List saved charts

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. It indicates a read-only operation ('List all charts'), implying no side effects. However, it does not disclose details like permission requirements, rate limits, or whether the list is subject to pagination, leaving some uncertainty for the agent.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the key action. It contains no redundant words and efficiently conveys the purpose and output. Every part of the sentence earns its place.

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 lack of output schema and the simplicity of the tool (zero parameters), the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool lists and what information is returned. However, it could be improved by noting behavior when the library is empty or if there are any error conditions, but for a trivial listing tool, this is adequate.

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 has zero parameters with 100% schema description coverage (since there are none). The description adds no parameter details, but this is acceptable as there are no parameters to explain. A score of 4 reflects that the description does not need to compensate for missing parameter information.

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 states 'List all charts in the on-disk library, with their slugs and served URLs.' It uses a specific verb ('List'), specifies the resource ('charts'), and includes scope ('on-disk library') and output details ('slugs and served URLs'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'create_chart' or 'analyze_chart'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to list all charts vs. using 'analyze_chart' or 'preview_chart'). It also lacks context on prerequisites or limitations, such as the need for a populated library or performance considerations for large datasets.

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