list_scripts

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It describes a read-only list operation and filtering, but lacks details about output format or potential side effects. The operation is simple, so the gap is moderate.

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, highly efficient, with the main action in the first sentence and an optional qualifier in the second. No unnecessary words.

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's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers the essential purpose and filtering behavior. It could mention the return format (e.g., file paths) for full completeness, but the core use case is clear.

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 sole parameter 'folder' is described in the schema as 'Optional folder under Assets', but the description adds semantic value by specifying it is a 'folder prefix' filter, going beyond the schema explanation. Schema coverage is 100%.

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 the verb 'list' and the resource 'C# scripts under Assets', with a specific filter option. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_scripts_by_assembly or list_prefabs by focusing on C# scripts.

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 specifies when to use the tool (list all C# scripts, optionally filter by folder). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context of sibling tools provides implicit guidance.

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