params_list

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the description is not burdened with safety details. It adds useful operational context beyond annotations: it may take a few seconds on slow links, can return partial results, exposes missing indices, and warns about float precision limits.

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 front-loaded with what the tool does, followed by operational details. Every sentence adds useful information without wasteful repetition.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not fully define return values, but it still helpfully documents partial status, missing_indices, and precision_limited. It is complete for calling the tool, though it lacks explicit sibling-routing guidance.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the meaning of the single parameter. It does so well by explaining that the pattern is optional, case-insensitive, and glob-like, with a concrete example such as 'COMPASS_*'.

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: download all parameters and return those matching an optional glob. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like params_get or params_backup.

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 optional glob filter and read-only nature imply when the tool is useful, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it instead of params_get, params_backup, or params_diff. The performance note about slow links helps set expectations but does not route between alternatives.

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