list_script_includes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds value by disclosing the SCRIPTING_ENABLED requirement, which is a behavioral condition not captured in annotations. This helps the agent understand preconditions.

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 includes a key prerequisite. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. While brief, it efficiently conveys the essential 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?

For a simple list tool with optional parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate. It covers the basic purpose and a requirement, but could mention that results are filtered lists (implied by params) or contrast with single-record retrieval tools. Overall, it is minimally complete.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions for query, active, and limit. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline expectation without enhancement.

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 script includes, which is a specific verb+resource. It also mentions a prerequisite (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true), distinguishing it from sibling list tools like list_acls or list_assets. This effectively communicates the tool's purpose.

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 conditions by stating a prerequisite (SCRIPTING_ENABLED=true) but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_script_include or search_script_includes. No when-not-to-use or sibling comparisons are provided.

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