discover_tools

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

With no annotations, the description provides moderate transparency: it reveals the return format (dict with keys: exposed, internal, total, exposed_count) and the V1_EXPOSED distinction, but lacks details on side effects, rate limits, or authentication.

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 extremely concise: two sentences and a return line. The purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence is informative with no wasted words.

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 no parameters, no annotations, and the presence of an output description, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, alternative tool, and return keys, though it could mention if the listing is paginated or limited in any way.

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 (0 params), so baseline is 4. The description adds no param info (none needed), and the empty schema fully covers what's expected.

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 lists exposed and internal tools, using specific verbs ('조회' meaning view/list), and directly distinguishes from sibling execute_tool by explaining how internal tools can be called.

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 explains when to use this tool (to get the full list) and mentions the alternative execute_tool for calling internal tools, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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