creator_list_parameters

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'List' which suggests a read-only operation, but it doesn't explicitly confirm non-destructiveness or describe the output format, pagination, or any side effects. The inclusion of 'current values and ranges' adds some context but not full transparency.

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 a single sentence that is tight and information-dense: 'List puppet parameters (including groups) with current values and ranges.' Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 no-parameter list operation, the description covers the essential purpose and scope (including groups, current values, ranges). However, it doesn't specify the return format or whether it returns all parameters at once, which could be useful given there is no output schema. Still, it's largely complete for this low-complexity 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?

The tool has no parameters (input schema is empty), so schema description coverage is 100%. The description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics; per the guidelines, 0 params yields a baseline of 4. No additional parameter information is required.

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 identifies the action 'List' and the resource 'puppet parameters', including groups, with current values and ranges. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like creator_set_parameter or creator_arm_parameter, which imply modification.

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 inspection but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like creator_set_parameter. There is no mention of exclusions or contextual scenarios, leaving the agent to infer the intended use.

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