list_dimensions

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. 'List' implies a read-only, side-effect-free operation, but the description never states that explicitly, nor does it mention permissions, pagination, or any constraints on the returned dimensions.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the verb and resource without wasted words. For a zero-parameter list tool, this is appropriately sized and every element of the sentence earns its place.

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 zero parameters and an output schema present, most of the integration burden is already carried by structured fields. The main gap is that the description omits the workflow hint its sibling set implies: call this first to see which dimensions can then be passed to analyze_dimension.

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 zero parameters and the empty input schema is trivially fully covered, so the baseline 4 applies. There is nothing for the description to explain beyond what the schema already shows.

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?

States a specific action ('List') on a specific resource ('the DNA dimensions available for analysis'), and the phrase 'available for analysis' scopes the result against the analyze_dimension sibling. It is clear and distinguishable, though it does not explicitly name the sibling tools it differs from.

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 given on when to call this tool versus analyze_dimension, analyze_repository, or generate_skills. The intended workflow (discover dimensions first, then invoke analyze_dimension) is only implied by the tool's name and the word 'available,' so an agent must infer the call context.

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