list_diagrams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe, read-only nature is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it lists only 'currently open' diagrams within 'this server process', clarifying the scope and timing of the result beyond the annotation metadata.

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 with no filler words. Every phrase ('every diagram', 'currently open', 'in this server process') contributes meaning and is concise.

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 has zero parameters, an output schema is present (so return format need not be described), and annotations cover safety/idempotency, the description is fully sufficient. It clearly states what is listed and the context of 'open in this server process'.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing to document; baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description mentions the scope of the listing (open diagrams) but adds no parameter-level details since none exist.

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' with a clear resource 'diagrams' and scoping phrase 'currently open in this server process.' It immediately distinguishes from sibling tools like open_diagram, describe_diagram, or save_diagram, which involve different actions.

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 clearly implies the use case (to see all open diagrams) but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it name alternative tools. The context is clear but without exclusions or alternatives, it remains merely implied.

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