gradle-list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat these. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as side effects or authentication needs, but given the annotations, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 sentence, extremely concise. It front-loads the purpose but lacks any detail about parameters or usage. For a tool with a simple enum-based parameter set, this brevity is acceptable but could benefit from a bit more 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of annotations, the description is mostly complete. However, without an output schema, the agent might need to know what the tool returns. The description does not hint at the output format, leaving a slight gap in completeness.

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 2 parameters with 50% description coverage: 'module' has a description 'e.g., ':app'', but 'operation' only has an enum. The tool description does not add any parameter meaning beyond the schema. Since the schema provides sufficient detail for the enum, a baseline of 3 is adequate.

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 'Introspect project structure' combined with the tool name 'gradle-list' clearly indicates that this tool lists elements of the project structure. However, it does not specify that it can list variants, modules, or tasks, which is covered by the input schema enum. The verb 'introspect' is less common but still conveys inspection.

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 siblings like gradle-build or gradle-get-details. It does not mention exclusions or context of use, leaving the agent to infer from the name and schema alone.

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