optimizer_list_techniques

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

The description discloses that the tool only returns a menu with names, complexity, and when to reach for it, not full implementations. This is a behavioral trait beyond a simple list. No annotations are provided, so the description carries this burden effectively.

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 sentences, each essential. The first states the primary function, and the second adds column details and a critical behavioral note. No unnecessary 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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what is returned and the recall-aid nature. Minor gaps like sorting order are not critical.

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 schema description already fully covers the class parameter (e.g., 'Optional class filter... Omit for the full menu.'). The tool description repeats this information without adding new meaning, so it does not improve parameter understanding beyond 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('technique menu'), and clarifies that rows contain 'name + complexity + when to reach for it'. This distinguishes it from siblings like optimizer_get_technique (detail) and optimizer_list_classes (list only classes).

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 states the optional filter ('optionally filtered by class') and frames the tool as a 'recall aid' with 'No implementations'. This gives clear context for when to use it, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools for detailed information.

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