List plants

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions paging and sorting but lacks details on behavior (e.g., default pagination, sorting options, rate limits, authentication). The endpoint is provided but not behavioral traits.

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 (two sentences) and front-loads the core purpose. The endpoint information is an added benefit. However, it could be slightly more structured with usage hints.

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 no output schema and zero annotations, the description is minimal. It covers purpose and basic features but omits response format, error handling, or detailed pagination/sorting behavior. Adequate but not 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 coverage is 100% so the schema already documents parameters. The description adds context by hinting at filtering, paging, and sorting, but no additional semantic details beyond what is in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 plants with optional filtering, paging, and sorting. It is distinct from sibling tools like search_plants, but does not explicitly differentiate, so a slight deduction.

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?

While the description implies usage for listing with filters, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives like hortusfox_search_plants or when avoid it. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite information.

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