list_objects

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

With no annotations, the description adequately conveys that this is a read-only listing operation with no side effects. It does not explicitly state the return format or ordering, but the output schema likely covers that. The description is honest and matches expected behavior.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is fully front-loaded and does not waste tokens.

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 tool's simplicity, zero parameters, and presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It tells the user exactly what to expect without needing to explain return values, which the schema covers.

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 there is nothing to explain. The high schema coverage is irrelevant since no params exist. A baseline of 4 is appropriate because no additional meaning is needed.

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 lists all loaded object names in the current PyMOL session. The verb 'list' and resource 'loaded object names' make the purpose specific and distinct from sibling tools that operate on individual objects or selections.

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 the tool should be used when you need an overview of all loaded objects, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. For a simple listing tool this is acceptable but could be improved by noting it complements tools like get_object_info for individual objects.

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