list_methods

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return format (dict with success/error) and result structure (list of method signatures), including error behavior. However, it does not mention if the operation is read-only or any permissions needed.

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 well-structured with Args and Returns sections, but it is somewhat verbose (e.g., the full success/error structure). It front-loads the purpose and is efficient overall, though could be slightly more concise.

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 this simple one-parameter, list-returning tool, the description covers input, output format, error handling, and return value structure. No missing information given the complexity.

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 100% (one parameter with description). The description repeats the parameter name and purpose in an Args section but adds no additional meaning, format constraints, or examples beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get[s] list of methods in a package', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_classes (classes) and list_packages (packages) by focusing on methods.

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 description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Usage is implied by the name and purpose, but no exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, leaving an agent to infer context.

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