plur_stores_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds transparency by specifying that the output includes scope, path, engram count, and conditional metadata. It does not contradict annotations.

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 exceptionally concise with two sentences: the first provides the core purpose, and the second adds conditional detail. Every sentence is informative and without waste.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, annotations present, and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and what it returns. It explains the optional inclusion of metadata, which is complete for an agent to decide to use it.

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 no parameters (0 parameters, schema coverage 100%), so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning since none exist.

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 specific verbs ('List') and resources ('configured engram stores') and details the output fields (scope, path, engram count, and optional description/covers). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like plur_stores_add (add) and plur_scopes_discover (discover scopes).

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 states the tool lists all configured stores and helps pick the right scope, implying use when you need an overview of stores. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when not to use, but the context is clear given it's the only listing tool for stores.

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