list_available_tools

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It discloses that the tool fetches live data from tools.yaml, including newly added tools, and warns about a frozen connector list. This conveys dynamic, read-only behavior without explicit side effects, which is sufficiently transparent for a list operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, consisting of two sentences that convey the tool's purpose, a key behavioral nuance, and a practical usage tip. There is no redundant information, and every sentence serves a clear function, making it well-structured and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the simplicity of the operation (listing tools) and the absence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It explains when to call the tool, what it returns (a live list), and why it matters (frozen connector list). This fully equips the user to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is complete (100%). The description does not need to explain any parameters. Since no parameter information is added, the baseline score of 3 applies, indicating no additional semantic value provided beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states that the tool provides a live list of available tools from the current tools.yaml, including tools added after the chat started. It explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on enumeration of tools, making the purpose unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'call this before saying a tool is missing, then invoke with run_tool.' It also explains the context of Claude Desktop freezing the connector list, which clarifies why a live refresh is needed. This effectively directs the user to prefer this tool over alternatives in a specific scenario.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.