List avatars

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety and idempotency profile is covered. The description confirms the output is a list of catalog ids, which adds useful detail, but it does not provide additional behavioral context beyond what the annotations convey.

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 states the verb, resource, and scope without any filler. Every word earns its place, and the description is appropriately minimal for a zero-parameter read-only list 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 simple, no-parameter, read-only list operation, the description is largely complete: it identifies what is returned ('avatar catalog ids') and for whom ('profile avatars'). The absence of an output schema is slightly noticeable, but the wording makes the expected result clear enough for typical agent use.

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 no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so the description need not explain any inputs. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no misleading or missing parameter information.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('avatar catalog ids'), and the intended use ('available for profile avatars'). This clearly distinguishes it from the many sibling list tools such as nuvio_list_plugins and nuvio_list_profiles.

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 'available for profile avatars' gives clear context that this tool is for selecting or inspecting avatar choices when working with profiles. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource is distinct enough that no strong exclusion is needed.

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