query_list_patterns

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds little behavioral context beyond enumerating available items. There is no mention of output granularity, ordering, or whether the list is static, though the output schema likely covers the return shape.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the entire operation with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately minimal for a parameterless listing tool.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema, this description is sufficient: an agent knows exactly what operation is offered and that it is safe to call. No missing information would prevent correct selection or invocation.

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 zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, so there is nothing for the description to explain. The baseline of 4 for parameterless tools applies; the description correctly focuses on the operation rather than parameter details.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('all available Jaquel query patterns and templates'), making the operation unmistakable. It naturally distinguishes this list-all tool from the sibling query_get_pattern, which retrieves a single pattern.

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 phrase 'List all available' implies the tool should be used when an agent needs to enumerate the full set of patterns/templates, but the description never explicitly states when to use it versus query_get_pattern or query_get_operator_docs. No alternative tools or exclusions are named, so guidance is only implied.

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