list_icons

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals pagination support but omits other behaviors like ordering, response shape, defaults, or whether the result is a full enumeration of all icon names.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. The key operation and pagination detail are front-loaded, making it quick to parse and understand.

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 straightforward listing tool with only two query parameters, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it lacks any explanation of the return value or relationship to sibling tools, and with no output schema, an agent gets no further context to understand what a successful response looks like.

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%, with clear descriptions for limit and offset. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 the verb 'Lists' with a specific resource, 'available Lucide icons', and mentions pagination. This makes the core purpose clear and differentiates it from retrieval of a single icon, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from search_icons.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus search_icons or retrieve_icon. It only states what the tool does, not when to prefer it, leaving the agent to infer based on the tool name.

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