List Talonic Schemas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by stating stable status, that it lists all schemas, and details the return format. It also notes that both id forms are accepted by talonic_extract, providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 well-structured with clear sections: status, purpose, output details, usage guidelines, and tip. Every sentence serves a purpose and is front-loaded with the main function. No unnecessary 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 the tool has an output schema and zero parameters, the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, when to use, what it returns, and how it integrates with sibling tools. No gaps remain.

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 zero parameters, so the description cannot add parameter meaning. With 100% schema coverage (no parameters), baseline is 4. The description instead focuses on output, which is helpful but not strictly parameter semantics.

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 all saved schemas in the user's Talonic workspace. It specifies the exact fields returned (id, short_id, name, description, version, field count, full JSON Schema definition), differentiating it from siblings like talonic_save_schema and talonic_extract.

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?

Explicit 'USE WHEN' and 'DO NOT USE WHEN' sections provide clear context. It advises using when the user asks about schemas, before designing a new one, or before extraction; and not using when the user provides an inline schema. Also includes a tip to pair with talonic_extract.

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