get_input_kind_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the list reflects what the current OBS install can create (dynamic), but it does not explicitly confirm read-only behavior or absence of side effects, though 'List' implies this.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently states the verb, resource, and scope without any unnecessary words.

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 enumeration tool with one optional boolean parameter, the description covers the core purpose but ignores the parameter entirely and does not describe the return structure (no output schema exists). Given the undocumented parameter, completeness is only average.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not mention the 'unversioned' parameter at all. The agent has no semantic understanding of what toggling 'unversioned' does, and the description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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?

Description uses the specific verb 'List', identifies the resource as 'input kind (source type)', and scopes it to 'this OBS install can create'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_input_list (which lists existing inputs) and get_source_filter_kind_list (which lists filter kinds).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, nor any mention of alternative tools. The intended use scenario is implied by the description but not stated as a guideline.

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