discover

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It explains the behavioral output: a sorted list of unique tag names and a count, implying a read-only operation. There is no mention of side effects or limitations, but for a simple listing tool this is sufficient transparency.

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 concise and front-loaded with the primary action. The Returns section provides structured detail on the output without being verbose. Every sentence contributes meaningful information, and the formatting is clean.

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?

For a tool with no parameters, an existing output schema, and low complexity, the description covers the semantic meaning of the output (unique tags, sorted, count) and its utility (browsing/filtering). It is fully adequate for an agent to understand when and how to invoke it.

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 tool takes zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so there is no parameter detail to provide. The baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to add anything about parameters.

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 'Discover all indexed tags' and then specifies it returns a list of unique tag names. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search (which searches content) and index_filebase (which indexes files). The verb 'Discover' plus the resource 'indexed tags' makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 says it is 'useful for browsing and filtering indexed material,' providing a clear use case. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it misses the highest bar of explicit exclusions and alternatives.

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