List Blocklists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds useful scoping context ('live and local'), but does not disclose details such as whether network calls are made, what the response structure looks like, or how 'live' vs 'local' differs.

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 action, resource, and scope without any filler. Every word earns its place and no unnecessary qualifiers are present.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool with comprehensive annotations, the description is nearly complete. It doesn't describe the return format, but the absence of an output schema makes that a minor gap; the core what and where are covered.

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 schema coverage is vacuously 100%. The baseline for no parameters is 4; the description does not need to explain parameters, and it doesn't attempt to add irrelevant details.

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'), a clear resource ('blocklist sources'), and adds scope ('live and local', 'configured in Crab-hole'). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like list_custom_rules and list_config_backups, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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 purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer when to use it: to view blocklist sources. However, the description gives no explicit guidance on when not to use it or what alternative to choose, though the sibling names are distinct enough that confusion is unlikely.

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