list_maps

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

The description notes it 'Reads the project file only and does not modify or save it', which is key safety info. No annotations exist, so description carries the behavioral burden. Missing details on potential errors or exact return format (handled by output schema).

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?

Three concise sentences: function, usage context, and safety guarantee. No extraneous words; efficiently packed.

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 list tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and safety. Lacks explicit error handling and return format description, but is largely complete.

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 parameter aprx_path is well-described in the schema with path constraints and behavior. The description adds usage context but no extra parameter details. Despite schema coverage signal being 0%, the property description is adequate.

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 function: 'List map names inside a saved ArcGIS Pro .aprx project'. It specifies the resource (map names in an .aprx project) and differentiates from siblings like list_layers by focusing on maps.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'before map-scoped operations when the target map name is unknown or when validating project contents'. It implies not needed if map name is known, but does not explicitly exclude alternatives like list_layers_in_map.

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