listCurves

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'List all Curves' implies a read operation but doesn't specify whether this requires permissions, how results are returned (format, ordering), whether it's paginated (though schema suggests it might be), or any rate limits. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the obvious.

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 extremely concise at just three words, front-loading the essential information with zero wasted words. Every word earns its place in communicating the core functionality.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'Curves' are in this context, what format results are returned in, or provide any behavioral context. The minimal description leaves too many questions unanswered given the tool's complexity and lack of supporting documentation.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters (filters, limit, offset, parentId) with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 'List all Curves' clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('Curves'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'getCurves' or 'listBlendShapes' that might have similar listing functionality, preventing a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'getCurves', 'listBlendShapes', and 'query' that might retrieve similar data, there's no indication of when this specific listing tool is appropriate versus other retrieval methods.

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