list_profile_configs

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

No annotations exist, so description bears full burden. It discloses the return shape (name, type, target path, description) and that it lists configs, which implies a read-only operation. However, it omits potential side effects or permissions.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, parameter, return. No wasted words, front-loaded with main action.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adds sufficient context (return fields) and parameter guidance, leaving no obvious gaps for an agent.

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?

With 0% schema parameter description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining the 'namespace' parameter as 'Profile namespace (as returned by pull_team_profile)', providing crucial context beyond the bare schema.

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 verb 'list' and resource 'config files in a pulled team profile', and it distinguishes from siblings like 'list_backups' and 'pull_team_profile'.

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 after pull_team_profile via the arg clarification, but does not explicitly state when to use vs. alternatives or provide exclusionary guidance.

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