ketan_list_beliefs

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only action ('List') and scoping to the session, but it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-mutating, mention return format, or describe behavior when no beliefs exist. It adds some context beyond the name but leaves room for more transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary verb and resource, and includes a clarifying second sentence. It has no redundant filler or unnecessary details, making it highly concise.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and an existing output schema (per context signals), so the description does not need to explain return values. It covers what is listed, what a belief is, and the session scope. A minor omission is the lack of explicit mention of it being read-only, but for a simple listing tool, the description is largely 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not (and need not) elaborate on parameter semantics since none exist. The input schema already shows an empty property set, and the description focuses on the tool's action rather than parameters.

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's purpose: 'List all active beliefs tracked by the Epistemic Belief Engine.' It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('beliefs'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ketan_observe_belief by focusing on listing existing beliefs.

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 when you need to see current session beliefs, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The context about 'facts observed about the workspace during this session' provides some situational guidance, but not formal exclusions.

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