list_stanzas

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates a read-oriented listing action and the fields returned, but it does not describe filtering semantics, ordering, pagination, or whether all accessible stanzas are returned. Basic behavior is clear, but meaningful details are missing.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then adds the key filter options. There is no fluff or redundant restating of the schema.

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 tool is simple, has no required parameters, and has an output schema, the description covers the main surface. However, because there are no annotations and schema descriptions are absent, the lack of explicit filter semantics and usage distinctions leaves noticeable gaps for an agent deciding how to call this tool correctly.

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 0% and the schema only lists property names and defaults, so the description must compensate. The phrase 'Optional prefix, tag, or role filter' identifies all three parameters and marks them optional, but it does not explain what prefix applies to, whether filters combine, or how values are matched. This is not enough detail for confident invocation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'List stanzas', and then enumerates the returned fields (title, description, tags, roles, size). It clearly distinguishes itself from singular tools like get_stanza and from other list tools by naming the exact resource and output scope.

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 as a general listing/browsing tool for stanzas and mentions optional filters, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over get_stanza, list_projects, list_roles, or other siblings. There is no exclusion or alternative guidance, only an implied read/browse context.

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