list_poses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about read-only safety, the return shape, or whether the sequence is included or just its name. Only the origin of the data (servogui.json) is disclosed.

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?

It is a single short fragment with no padding, but it is not a complete sentence and is under-specified rather than concise. Nothing is front-loaded because there is no verb clause to lead with.

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 simple, zero-parameter read tool this could be complete in one sentence, but with no output schema the description should at least say what a caller gets back (pose names, coordinates, stored sequence). That essential information is absent.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and there is no parameter semantics to compensate for. Baseline 4 applies.

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 name supplies the verb ('list') while the description only names the resource: 'Poses and the sequence saved from the GUI (servogui.json).' The reference to the GUI-saved file is a useful distinguishing detail beyond a pure restatement of the name, but the fragment never states that it lists or returns anything.

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 indication of when to call this versus go_to_pose or play_sequence, which operate on the same pose/sequence data. The agent is left to infer that this is the retrieval counterpart to those action tools.

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