list_modpacks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the scanning path, return structure, format mapping, and best-effort reads. It does not cover error handling or permissions, but for a read-only listing tool, the details given are sufficient and transparent.

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?

Two sentences deliver all essential information without redundancy. Every clause adds value: scanning path, output shape, format mapping, best-effort caveat, and the launch_game link. The description is dense yet coherent, earning a 5.

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 no parameters, the description fully specifies the tool's behavior and return format. It also situates the tool within the broader workflow via the launch_game link. No critical information is missing for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 adds context by explaining the output fields and how `name` relates to launch_game, which effectively covers the semantics of the implicit data the tool returns.

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 function: 'List installed modpacks' with a specific scanning path. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_modpacks and list_versions by specifying the source and output format. The linkage to launch_game (passing name as version) further clarifies its role.

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 provides clear context on what the tool does and hints at its use for launching games, but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives. It gives a practical usage tip ('pass it as version to launch_game'), which is helpful guidance.

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