openl List Design Repository Features

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds no further behavioral details beyond confirming it's a read operation. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, each purposeful: first states purpose, second gives usage context, third provides parameter guidance. No wasted words.

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?

Sufficient for a list tool: describes output type (features), usage pattern, and key parameter. No output schema exists, but the description gives a reasonable idea of returns. Could further detail feature value types.

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 description adds clarity to the repository parameter with a concrete example of using display name vs. ID, complementing the schema description (100% coverage). The response_format parameter is adequately described in 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?

Clearly states the tool retrieves features of a design repository with examples (branching, searchable). Differentiates from sibling tools like openl_list_repositories, but does not explicitly contrast with openl_list_branches.

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?

Explicitly advises using this tool to check for feature support before dependent operations. Also instructs to use repository display name instead of ID. Does not specify when not to use or list alternatives.

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