List Resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral detail beyond that: two distinct resource kinds exist, and each is identifiable by a different field ('uri' vs 'uri_template' with {name} placeholders), which shapes how the caller should interpret results.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the return shape. The field-level detail about 'uri' and 'uri_template' overlaps somewhat with the declared output schema, so it is not entirely waste-free, but nothing is padded.

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?

With no parameters, rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers everything the agent needs to invoke the tool correctly. The main omission is any statement of pagination/limits or how the result feeds into read_resource.

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. Nothing in the description misrepresents or contradicts the empty input 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: "List all available resources and resource templates." It clearly distinguishes itself from most siblings (bills, legislation, votes, etc.), though it does not explicitly contrast with the adjacent discovery tools list_prompts and read_resource.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent is expected to infer that this is a discovery step that precedes read_resource. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement and no mention of the related tools in the same family.

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