aleph_list_collections

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

Annotations already communicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with them. It adds a useful nuance that collections are 'available to you', implying permission-scoped results, but doesn't go further into pagination, result shape, or filtering behavior beyond the schema.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and a practical follow-up about using collection IDs downstream. Every sentence earns its place with no 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 an optional-parameter list tool with rich schema descriptions and safety annotations, the description is complete: it states what the tool lists, what the returned IDs are for, and how this fits into a larger search workflow. No output schema exists, but the tool's return value is inferable as a list of collection objects.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters already have meaningful documentation. The description's category examples (leaks, company registries, sanctions lists) reinforce the category parameter but add no parameter-level detail 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 starts with a specific verb and resource, 'List or search the datasets (collections) available to you', and gives concrete examples of collection types. It also differentiates itself from aleph_search by framing collections as the source-discovery layer and explicitly pointing the agent to pass collection IDs to aleph_search afterward.

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?

It gives a clear usage context: use this tool to discover what sources exist before scoping an aleph_search query. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it versus aleph_get_collection, but the discovery-oriented guidance is enough for most routing decisions.

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