describe_tools

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

No annotations provided, but the description implies it is a read-only, informational tool. It does not mention side effects or destructive behavior, which is appropriate for a guide tool. The description is sufficient for understanding its behavior.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a usage tip. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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 simple input schema (one optional param) and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains the output (guide grouped with examples/tips) and use case. Could hint at the output format, but not essential.

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 coverage is 100% (parameter described). The description adds context about 'grouped by category' but does not enhance the parameter semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get a structured guide to all available tools — grouped by category, with workflow examples and tips.' This is specific (verb 'get', resource 'structured guide') and distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform specific actions.

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?

Explicit advice: 'Call this first if you've never used this server before.' This gives clear context for when to use it. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the use case is well-defined.

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