list_poly_v_profiles

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

Annotations are absent, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. 'List' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it describe the output format. For a simple listing tool, this is acceptable but not fully transparent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It immediately conveys the standard and the specific profile types. Extremely concise and efficient.

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 listing tool with no parameters, the description is complete in scope. It specifies the exact standard and profile types. It does not describe the return format, but given the simplicity and lack of output schema, this is a minor omission. The description is adequate for the tool's purpose.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain any parameters, and no extra information is required. This score reflects the baseline for parameter-free tools.

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 precisely identifies the resource: ISO 9982:2021 PH, PJ, PK, PL, and PM Poly-V pulley profiles. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_v_belt_profiles (V-belt) and resolve_poly_v_profile (resolution of a specific profile).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. However, the name and description imply it is for browsing available profiles before selection. The lack of explicit conditions or alternatives is a minor gap, but not misleading.

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