langflow_kb_list_components

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and a closed world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that the source is an "instancia indexada" (indexed instance) — useful snapshot semantics, but nothing about pagination, result size behavior, or what happens beyond the limit.

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?

Two compact sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the filter capability second; no filler. It is arguably terse given the tool's three parameters, but nothing is wasted.

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 read-only list tool with good annotations this is close to adequate, but there is no output schema and the description does not explain the maximum/default of "limite" semantics or the undocumented "response_format" parameter. An agent can call it, but with avoidable ambiguity.

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 67%: "limite" and "categoria" are documented in the schema, while "response_format" is not documented anywhere. The description restates the category filter but adds no meaning beyond the schema's own example ("files_and_knowledge"), so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Lista los componentes disponibles en la instancia indexada") plus a scope modifier (with their category). This clearly separates it from siblings like describe_component or search_docs, though it never names those alternatives explicitly.

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?

"Acepta filtro por categoria" implies the filtering use case, but there is no statement of when to prefer this tool over langflow_kb_describe_component or langflow_kb_search_fields, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given. Usage is inferable but not directed.

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