list_op

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains parameter dependencies and provides an example, but does not mention output format, error behavior, or side effects. This adds some context but lacks deeper behavioral details.

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 concise and well-structured with 'When:', 'Params:', and 'Example:' sections. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the most important usage context is front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, multiple modes), the description covers the essential usage thoroughly. It lacks some minor details like the meaning of sort_a vs sort_d and angle_mode values, but the presence of an output schema and clear parameter rules make it 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 0%, but the description compensates fully by defining op values and explaining which parameters are needed for each op. All 7 parameters are addressed, including the angle_mode for seq expressions. This is far more informative than the bare schema.

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 clearly states the tool performs LIST utilities (sequence, cumsum, sort, ΔList) and explicitly distinguishes it from stats summaries. The allowed op values are listed, providing a specific verb+resource for each operation.

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 gives a clear 'When' clause specifying list utilities and excluding stats summaries, which implicitly guides away from sibling stats tools. It also gives usage rules such as 'seq needs expression,start,end[,step]' and 'others need data', helping the agent choose the correct parameter sets.

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