dictionaries_list_names

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states a simple listing behavior with no side effects, but lacks details on caching, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. Adequate for a straightforward read tool.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no waste. Every word serves a purpose.

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 tool has no parameters and an output schema exists (context shows has output schema: true), the description is sufficiently complete. It explains the tool's purpose and directs to tool_help for additional info.

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 tool has no parameters, so baseline is 4. However, the description's instruction to 'call tool_help for parameters' is misleading since there are none, slightly reducing clarity. The schema coverage is 100% as there are no parameters to document.

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 tool lists dictionary names accepted by dictionaries_get, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by referencing a specific companion tool.

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 implies usage before dictionaries_get but does not explicitly state when to use or alternatives. It directs to tool_help for parameters, which is useful but does not provide context on when this tool should be chosen over others.

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