List Toolsets

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

The readOnlyHint annotation is reinforced, but the description adds crucial nuance beyond it: 'Hidden tools stay callable — enabling only affects what tools/list advertises.' This discloses an important behavioral trait that annotations alone do not convey, and also explains the visibility rules for different auth contexts.

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 sentences, all front-loaded with the primary purpose first. Each subsequent sentence adds meaningful context about visibility and enabling, with no filler or repetition of the schema.

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 parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what is returned (slug, tool count, visibility) and the behavioral semantics around visibility and callability. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to use it correctly.

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 has zero parameters and the schema fully covers that with an empty object, so the description has no parameter burden. A baseline of 4 is appropriate because there is nothing to compensate for and the no-parameter nature is clear.

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', the resource 'toolsets', and the exact output fields (slug, tool count, visibility). It distinguishes itself from sibling list_* tools by focusing specifically on toolsets and by naming enable_toolset as the related action.

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 explicitly says 'enable others with enable_toolset', giving a direct pointer to the sibling tool for the complementary action. It also clarifies when tools are visible based on key type and session, and notes that hidden tools remain callable, so the agent knows when listing is relevant.

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