get_specification_descriptions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the operation is a 'List', which implies a read-only, non-mutating behavior, and that it returns available descriptions, but it does not disclose details such as output format, behavior on missing document, or error cases. This is minimal but not misleading.

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?

A single sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the verb and immediately states scope.

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?

For a tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves the meaning of 'specification descriptions' ambiguous. It does not explain what a description is, how the list is returned, or how this relates to the broader specification workflow. Given the simple read-only nature, this is a moderate gap.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'document_id' parameter. The phrase 'selected or active document' suggests that a null document_id resolves to the active document, adding meaning beyond the schema's type and default. However, this is implied rather than explicit.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('specification descriptions') and scopes it to the selected or active document. It is clear enough to distinguish from the sibling 'get_specification' by the word 'descriptions', but it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it does not fully meet the 5-level bar.

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 provides a contextual condition ('selected or active document') that implies when the tool applies, but it offers no guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like 'get_specification' or 'preview_specification_generation'. This is implied usage, not explicit when/when-not guidance.

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