list_prompts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns JSON with prompt metadata, but it does not state whether the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, or potential side effects. Given that this is a list operation, more transparency about rate limits or pagination would be helpful.

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 two sentences with no extraneous information. It is well front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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 no parameters and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it could mention if there is any implicit filtering (e.g., all prompts in the workspace) or refer to the output schema for more detail, since output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so description does not need to add parameter details. According to guidelines, with 0 params the baseline is 4, and the description is adequate in this regard.

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 'List all available prompts' which is a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_prompt' (which retrieves a single prompt) and other list tools (list_docs, list_sections).

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 by stating it lists all prompts, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, such as 'get_prompt' for a specific prompt or 'search_docs' for searching within prompts. No exclusions or context are provided.

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