List available actions for resource

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by explaining it combines schema actions with live ActionInfo and AllowableValues, and by summarizing the return structure. This gives useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the key guidance, and includes a concrete example. No wasted words.

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 output schema and annotations, the description sufficiently covers purpose, return format, and usage context. It might benefit from explicitly stating that it is read-only, but annotations already convey that. Overall, it's complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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 describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the description doesn't need to re-explain them. The example call with a concrete URI adds practical semantic value, making the parameter usage clear.

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 it lists available actions for a resource URI and distinguishes it from sibling get/list tools by focusing on action metadata. The verb 'list available actions' is specific, and the phrase 'prefer this before any unfamiliar write/action call' establishes its unique role.

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 instruction to 'prefer this before any unfamiliar write/action call' explicitly tells the agent when to use it. It does not enumerate when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is sufficiently clear for a discovery tool.

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