List bSDD reference data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the detail that units include QUDT URIs and that these are allowed field values, offering contextual behavior beyond the annotations, but doesn't disclose response format or other behavioral traits.

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?

Two concise sentences with no superfluous information. The first sentence front-loads the action and resource, the second adds important context about usage.

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?

With one simple parameter and no output schema, the description adequately conveys that the tool returns a reference list for a given kind. However, it doesn't specify the exact response format (e.g., array of code/name pairs), which could be helpful but isn't critical for this simple, read-only 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?

The schema already covers the 'kind' parameter with a full enum and description, so the baseline is 3. The description enhances this by naming the specific lists and noting that units include QUDT URIs, and by explaining that these are allowed values for class and property fields, adding meaning beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'bSDD reference lists' and enumerates the exact lists (countries, languages, units, reference documents). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that list dictionaries or classes, as 'reference lists' is a distinct category.

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 explains that these lists are 'the allowed values for the corresponding fields on classes and properties,' providing clear context for when to use this tool. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the sibling tool names (e.g., list_dictionaries, list_dictionary_classes) and the reference to 'reference lists' imply this is for reference data rather than dictionary content.

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