List Harness Engineering Handbook Chapters

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this returns a 'chapter map' rather than full content and enumerates the chapter topics, which is useful behavioral context beyond the structured fields.

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?

Two sentences, both purposeful. The first states the action and scope, the second gives usage routing. Every word earns its place, and the most decision-relevant instruction is front-loaded.

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 zero-required-parameter list tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, scope, and when to choose a different tool. No missing return-format information because the output schema exists.

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 100%: the only parameter, 'locale', is fully documented in the schema with an enum and default value. The description adds no extra parameter detail, so the baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'List the Harness Engineering Handbook chapters (HRN-001…)', and clarifies the resource's scope as a canonical long-form corpus. It also names its sibling 'search' and explains the distinction, so an agent can tell list_handbook apart from related tools without inspecting schemas.

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 gives explicit when-to-use ('Use this to see the chapter map') and when-not-to-use ('use `search` when you have a topic rather than a chapter'), naming the alternative tool directly. This leaves no ambiguity about selection.

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