keychain_list_platforms

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation by listing platforms and statuses, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, potential side effects, or limitations such as rate limits or required authentication (though the API key context is given).

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, well-structured sentence with no redundant information. It is efficiently front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

The description covers the basic functionality and context (current API key) but lacks details about the output format (e.g., structure of returned data, pagination). Given the absence of an output schema, more completeness would be helpful but is not critically lacking for a simple list operation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the only parameter ('category'). The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema; it fails to mention the filtering capability. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 action ('list'), the resource ('all available platform connectors in the UnClick Keychain catalog'), and additional context ('with connection status for the current UNCLICK_API_KEY'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like keychain_connect and keychain_disconnect by focusing on listing and status.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., keychain_status) or any prerequisites. The description lacks explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use instructions.

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