listar_sinteses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that it lists syntheses and accepts a language parameter. It does not indicate whether the operation is read-only, if there are pagination limits, or any other constraints beyond the basic function.

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 with no wasted words: one sentence for purpose and one for the parameter. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no required fields) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter. However, it lacks context about the output format (e.g., list of summaries) and whether any filtering or ordering is supported, leaving minor gaps for a complete understanding.

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 input schema for 'lang' has no description (0% coverage). The description adds meaning by specifying allowed language codes ('pt', 'en', 'es') and the default value 'pt', which aids correct parameter usage beyond the schema's default property.

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' and the resource 'philosophical period syntheses' with a defined scope ('Pre-Socratics through 20th century'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_sintese' (singular) and 'listar_pensadores' (plural of other entities).

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 implies usage for listing all syntheses by period but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives like 'get_sintese' or exclusion criteria. No when-not-to-use or alternative suggestions are given.

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