system_drivers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explicitly marks the tool as [SAFE] and discloses the underlying OS commands (driverquery, lsmod, kextstat), giving transparency into behavior. It does not mention side effects, but the safe tag implies read-only.

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 front-loads the safety marker and the core purpose, followed by implementation details. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description does not explain the return format (e.g., list of driver names or details). Given low complexity, it is adequate but missing details on what the agent can expect from the output.

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 no parameters (100% coverage with 0 parameters), so baseline is 4. No additional parameter information is needed or provided in the description.

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 system drivers' with a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like system_service_list or system_process_list by focusing on drivers, and provides OS-specific implementation details.

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 implies usage for listing system drivers across platforms but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as system_service_list or system_process_list. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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