list_settings

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It details return fields (path, type, description, allowed values, default, side effects, restartRequired, sensitivity, tags, live value) and mentions availableTags. It does not explicitly state read-only nature but implies it. Very transparent overall.

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?

Single paragraph that front-loads purpose and then adds details. Each sentence contributes value, but could be slightly more streamlined. Still efficient for the amount of information.

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 output schema, description compensates by listing all fields returned. Covers parameter semantics, usage guidance, and alternative tools. Fully adequate for a list tool without complex nested structures.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds concrete examples of tag filtering (e.g., 'tag="voice-clone" returns settings for voice-clone training'), enhancing understanding of parameter usage.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'list' and resource 'every setting', including the scope 'agent-discoverable, schema-validated path'. It distinguishes from siblings like describe_setting (single setting) and get_config/set_config (lower-level).

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this as the entry point for any agent setting introspection' and notes paths outside catalog are only accessible via get_config/set_config, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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