List Harness Engineering Handbook Chapters

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds that this returns the 'chapter map' (a high-level listing, not full chapter content) and specifies the chapter range 'HRN-001…' and the corpus scope. This clarifies output granularity beyond the annotations.

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: the first states the action and scope, the second provides usage direction. No redundant phrases; every clause adds distinctive detail (chapter prefix, corpus topics, alternative tool). Highly 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?

For a simple list tool with optional locale, the description covers purpose, usage, and alternatives. An output schema exists, so return format is already specified. The chapter content list in the description gives enough context for an agent to decide when to use it.

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 lone `locale` parameter is fully described in the schema with enum values and default. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, which is acceptable because the schema carries the full burden. Baseline 3 applies.

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 'List the Harness Engineering Handbook chapters (HRN-001…)' — a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling list_* tools by identifying this as the handbook chapter map and names the corpus content. The sibling list tools for knowledge/patterns/architectures/governance make the resource unique.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to see the chapter map; use `search` when you have a topic rather than a chapter.' This gives a clear when-to-use and an alternative. Also identifies the tool as listing the canonical long-form corpus, differentiating from other list tools.

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