list_buckets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It explains the concept of buckets but does not disclose operational behaviors such as whether the list is sorted, paginated, or whether it includes only names or also metadata. As a read-only list, the lack of side-effect disclosure is acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a helpful example. There is no wasted wording or redundancy.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool, the description is largely complete. It explains the domain concept and gives examples, but does not specify the exact return structure (e.g., bucket names only vs. metadata). Without an output schema, a little more detail would have been beneficial, but it's still sufficient for basic usage.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by clarifying the meaning of 'buckets' as organizational folders, which is useful context even though no parameter documentation is needed.

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 lists the user's memory buckets with a specific verb and resource. It also provides concrete examples ('Work', 'Personal', 'Health') and distinguishes this from sibling tools like list_bucket_categories or list_category_memories.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_memories_and_buckets or search_memories. The description is self-contained but provides no exclusions or contextual decision help.

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