echo_list_middleware

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It indicates a read-only listing operation, but does not disclose whether the output is a list of names or detailed objects, or any potential side effects. Basic transparency is present but limited.

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?

The description is one sentence of 12 words, perfectly concise and front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word carries value, with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it does not hint at the return format (e.g., a list of names or objects), which could be helpful for an agent to interpret the result. Still, it is sufficient for a simple listing 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?

There are no parameters, so the description does not need to add meaning. According to the rule '0 params = baseline 4', a score of 4 is appropriate since the schema coverage is trivially complete.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('available Echo framework middleware with their purpose and recommended chain order'). It distinctly separates this tool from sibling tools like echo_get_middleware, which retrieves details of a single middleware.

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 for browsing middleware, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear, but there is no guidance on when not to use it.

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