extension_list_scripts

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds that it lists scripts with specific extensions and in a subfolder, but does not disclose further behavior such as recursion, sorting, or output structure. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 that states the verb and object immediately. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or repetition.

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 simple list operation with one optional parameter, an output schema, and a read-only annotation, the description is fairly complete. It could be improved by explicitly stating how 'category' maps to subfolders, but the schema description covers the allowed values, so this is a minor 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?

The schema already provides 100% coverage with a description listing allowed values ('Comp, Edit, Color, Fairlight, Deliver, Utility'). The tool description adds the concept of a 'Fusion Scripts subfolder', implying that the 'category' parameter selects the subfolder, which gives extra meaning beyond the schema's list of values.

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 the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('scripts') and narrows scope with file extensions ('*.lua' / '*.py') and 'Fusion Scripts subfolder'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like extension_list_dctl and extension_list_fuses, which list other file types.

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 usage through its verb and object, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like extension_get_paths or extension_list_fuses. There is no mention of 'when not to use' or alternative tools, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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