parameter_list

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

No annotations are provided, but the description includes an important caveat about the presetOwner relationship, telling the agent not to read '.name' directly on getParameterPresets(). This behavioral hint adds value beyond the schema and is a good technical clarification.

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 compact, two sentences plus an Args section. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, includes a critical caveat, and specifies the input format concisely. Every sentence earns its place.

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 list operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what is listed, the format of the target, and an important implementation detail. No additional context is necessary for the agent to use it 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 only parameter, event_target, is described as 'event:/ path or {guid}'. This adds semantic detail beyond the schema's generic title 'Event Target', which the agent needs to know to construct a valid argument.

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 an event's game parameters, specifically name and guid. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like parameter_add and parameter_set_initial, and there is no other list tool with this exact scope.

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 gives a clear context: it lists parameters for an event. It doesn't explicitly say when NOT to use it or mention alternatives, but the sibling tool set includes parameter_add/set_initial, so the usage context is fairly clear.

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