xcode_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the output (list of items) but does not describe side effects, error conditions, authentication needs, or that it likely invokes xcodebuild -list. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, front-loaded with the core action. It is concise and wastes no words. However, it could be slightly expanded (e.g., mention xcodebuild command) without losing brevity.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description does not explain the return format or structure of the listed items (e.g., strings, objects, arrays). Given the low complexity, a list of expectations would be valuable. The description also omits context like 'project path may default to working directory' which is only in the schema.

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% – both parameters (projectPath, timeoutSeconds) have explicit descriptions in the input schema. The tool description adds no further parameter meaning, so 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 'List available schemes, targets, and configurations in the project' with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('schemes, targets, and configurations'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like xcode_build or xcode_archive that perform actions rather than inspection.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus other Xcode tools. The purpose is implied (listing project components), but there is no 'when-to-use' or 'when-not-to-use' context, nor any mention of prerequisites like needing a project path.

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