List cached Cascade asset nodelets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds valuable context: it never reads Cascade directly, handles oversized responses by returning bounded _cache metadata, and states that structuredContent is authoritative when the response fits. This goes beyond annotations.

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 paragraph of 4 sentences, each adding unique value. It is concise but could benefit from breaking into logical sections or bullet points for readability. No fluff.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers usage dependency on cascade_read, pointer semantics, caching behavior, and response format. It lacks details on cursor and parameters, but those might be standard. Overall adequate.

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 coverage is 50% (cursor and lack descriptions). Description adds meaning for asset_handle and pointer (e.g., 'REQUIRED' and usage of empty string for root), but does not elaborate on cursor and . Baseline 3 with low coverage; description partially compensates.

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 title and description clearly state the tool lists cached Cascade asset nodelets for a given JSON Pointer. It distinguishes from siblings like cascade_asset_get_nodelet (single nodelet) and cascade_read (direct read). The verb 'list' and resource 'cached asset nodelets' are specific.

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 explicitly says 'Use after cascade_read' and how to use pointer for root nodelets. It contrasts with cascade_read's read_mode control. However, it does not provide explicit when-not-to-use scenarios or alternative tool names beyond cascade_read.

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