List man pages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states a read-only listing operation and defines the section semantics, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or return format. This is acceptable for a simple list operation but not exhaustive.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the main purpose. The parenthetical listing section meanings is dense but necessary and does not waste words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 simple listing tool with detailed schema documentation, the description covers the essential resource and filtering options. It omits explicit mention of return structure or ordering, but those are not critical for a list operation. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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 schema already describes both parameters (limit and section) with 100% coverage. The description adds significant semantic value by mapping each section enum value to its meaning (e.g., 1=commands, 2=syscalls), which the schema does not provide. This enrichment justifies a score above baseline.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('4.2BSD manual pages'), and the optional filtering by section. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_documents and list_syscalls by specifying the exact resource type.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool by describing optional section filtering and explaining what each section means. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or offer alternatives such as search_manpages, so it falls short of a 5.

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