list_chat_commands

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states it's a 'list' operation, implying read-only, but does not mention pagination (page, page_size), default values, or that workspace_name is required. No side effects or auth requirements are noted, which is a significant gap for a tool with six parameters.

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 extremely concise (one sentence, six words) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could be slightly expanded to mention the required workspace parameter without becoming verbose. Still efficient.

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?

The description is too minimal for a tool with six parameters and an output schema. It does not mention that workspace_name is required, how filters affect results, or what the output contains. While output schema exists, the description should still provide high-level context about usage scope.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters; it does not mention any parameter names or how they affect results. Thus it provides no extra value beyond the schema.

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 'List chat commands (slash-command instructions)' clearly identifies the verb (List) and resource (chat commands) and provides additional context that these are slash commands. This differentiates it from sibling tools like create_chat_command or get_chat_command.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_chat_command (for a specific command) or create_chat_command. The description does not mention required workspace context or filtering capabilities, leaving the agent to infer usage from the schema alone.

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