dataverse_list_plugin_assemblies

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

The description adds crucial behavioral context beyond annotations: ordering of results and the hierarchical relationship between assemblies, types, steps, and images. The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description's additions are valuable 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 extremely concise: three sentences that immediately convey the purpose, ordering, and key filtering capability. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 existence of an output schema (not shown) and detailed parameter schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects (ordering, filtering hierarchy). It could mention that it lists all assemblies in the environment unless filtered, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a listing tool.

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 description coverage is high (all parameters have descriptive comments in the schema). The tool description does not add new parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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 title and description clearly state the tool lists plug-in assemblies, with optional filtering. The description explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_plugin_assembly' by implying retrieval of multiple items and providing a hierarchy hint.

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 provides context on ordering ('newest-modified first') and filtering options ('package_id to scope to one plug-in package'). It also outlines the prerequisite chain, helping the agent understand the data model. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives.

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