List Canvases

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable specifics: it scans the entire vault, returns a numbered list of relative paths, and the total count. These details go beyond the annotations and provide a complete behavioral picture.

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?

Two sentences, front-loading the main action, each sentence informative. No wasted words. Perfectly concise for a simple tool.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns (numbered list of relative paths and count). It also covers scope, file type, and usage context. For a parameterless tool, this is complete.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 4. The description confirms 'Takes no parameters — scans the entire vault,' which adds clarity but no extra meaning. This is adequate.

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 tool enumerates all .canvas files, returning relative paths and count. It uses specific verbs ('Enumerate', 'scans') and distinguishes its purpose from sibling tools like read_canvas by framing it as a discovery step.

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 tells when to use the tool: 'Use to discover available canvases before calling read_canvas, add_canvas_node, or add_canvas_edge.' It provides clear context and alternative tools, fully guiding the agent on proper usage.

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