list_knowledge

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List' without detailing pagination behavior, return format, ordering, or the meaning of 'knowledge'. The schema reveals page/page_size but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic read operation.

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 a single sentence with six words, front-loaded with the verb and clear resource. It is efficiently sized with no wasted words, though its brevity leaves out potentially useful detail.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about what is returned, how pagination works, and what constitutes 'knowledge'. It only says the action and scope, leaving the agent without enough information to fully anticipate the tool's behavior.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents parameters (kb_id, page, page_size) with their types and defaults. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what's already in the schema, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'List knowledge in a knowledge base' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating a listing operation scoped to a knowledge base. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_knowledge' (retrieving a single item) and 'list_knowledge_bases' (listing base objects), though it doesn't explicitly call out these differences.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_knowledge' or 'hybrid_search'. The description gives no context about use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and schema.

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