List available toolsets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint, so the 'Read-only, no network call' sentence is partly redundant. However, the description adds genuinely non-structured behavior: only `catalog` and `auth` are enabled by default and the visible tool list is intentionally gated, which explains why other tools may be missing.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then the default-enabled constraint, then the routing advice. Each sentence carries distinct, actionable information with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, yet the description still summarizes them briefly. Combined with the default-enablement disclosure and the set_toolset routing, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and act on the result.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document and the baseline is 4. The description correctly spends no effort on arguments and instead covers return fields and server state.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List every toolset this server groups its tools into') and enumerates the returned fields (id, title, description, member tool names, enabled flag). It is unambiguously distinct from sibling set_toolset, which it names directly.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to call it ('Call this first if you're unsure which toolset covers what you need') and routes to the alternative ('use set_toolset to turn on the group a task actually needs'), even giving a concrete example (basket_and_checkout before placing an order).

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