get_specs

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

No annotations provided; description covers all behaviors: reads from local registry (non-destructive), returns empty array if none (not an error), describes return shape, and mentions prerequisite (engine initialized).

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?

Description is somewhat long but well-structured with clear sections: purpose, prerequisites, return, error, usage. Slightly verbose but effective.

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?

Complete coverage: no parameters, return type described, error behavior explained, usage guidance given. No output schema needed as return is described.

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?

No parameters exist, so baseline 4 is appropriate. Schema coverage is 100% as no params to cover.

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?

Description clearly states 'List all specs saved in the current project' with specific verb and resource. Distinguished from sibling get_spec (fetches full body) and create_spec.

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 tells when to use (before create_spec, before generate_code, to discover components) and when not to (use get_spec for full body).

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