voice_profiles_list

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already marks it as a safe read. The description adds useful behavior: results are newest-first and supersession is by row, so history remains interpretable because drafts reference the profile that produced them. This goes beyond the annotation and clarifies the data model.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the core action (list all profiles, newest first) and then adds a valuable explanatory clause. No wasted 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?

For a read-only list tool with a single obvious parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main behavioral details: resource scope, ordering, and supersession semantics. It leaves the exact return shape unspecified, but that is a minor gap for this simple list operation.

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 0% and the description does not mention workspaceId at all. The parameter name is self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation, leaving the required scope ('profiles in which workspace?') implicit.

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 says 'Alle Schreibstil-Profile (P5), newest first', which identifies a specific resource (writing-style profiles, P5) and an ordering. It is clear it lists all profiles, but it does not explicitly name a sibling like voice_profile_get, so it only weakly differentiates from alternatives.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description explains ordering and supersession semantics but never tells an agent to prefer this over voice_profile_get or voice_build for a given scenario.

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