kratos_list_variables

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the list is 'introspected from the live build,' which is a key behavioral detail indicating the data reflects the current runtime state. It also explains grouping and filtering, providing useful context beyond a bare 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 only two sentences and immediately conveys the resource, grouping, source, and filter semantics. It is front-loaded with the core verb and object, and every phrase provides value without repetition or 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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail the return structure. It sufficiently covers the source (live build), the grouping, and both filtering parameters. For a straightforward introspection/list tool, this is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it 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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explicitly explains both parameters: type_filter selects a group and name_filter is a substring. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema. It does not mention edge cases like how the filters combine when both are provided, but the core semantics are clear.

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 a clear resource ('Kratos variables') with examples of what is listed (DISPLACEMENT, TEMPERATURE) and how it is organized (by type). It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like kratos_list_elements and kratos_list_applications, which list different Kratos entities.

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 implies when to use the tool: whenever you need to inspect available Kratos variables and filter them by type or name. It provides clear context but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, so it falls short of the highest bar.

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