list_actors

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation but does not state side effects, return format, whether sublevel actors are included, or any other behavioral traits. More transparency is needed for a tool with no annotation support.

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, well-structured sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary 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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description lacks essential context for an agent: it does not mention the return format (e.g., actor paths, names), any caveats about what 'all actors' includes, or the existence of name_filter. Without an output schema or annotations, these gaps remain unaddressed.

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 provides full descriptions for both parameters (name_filter and class_filter), giving 100% coverage. The description adds little semantic value beyond mentioning class filtering, and it omits the name_filter parameter, but the schema itself compensates adequately.

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 uses a specific verb 'list' with a clear resource 'actors in the current level' and an optional filter. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like spawn_actor, delete_actor, or get_actor_properties, and the scope is well-defined.

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 when to use the tool by stating it lists actors in the current level, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over alternatives or any exclusions. It does not mention when to use it vs. tools like select_actors or get_actor_properties.

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