List a SmartList

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds 'Read-only' and the use case of discovering allowed values. However, it does not elaborate on openWorldHint (e.g., lists may be extensible) or describe return format/pagination, so it adds limited behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core verb+resource, then a concrete usage tip. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff.

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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description covers purpose, usage, and the enumeration of allowed list types. No output schema exists, but the reference-list nature and param enum provide enough context. A deeper note on return format would push it to 5, but it is not necessary.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with the 'list' parameter fully documented via an enum and description. The description mentions some example values (caliber, manufacturer, etc.) but does not add meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Return one of FastBound's reference lists (allowed values)' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from sibling tools by framing it as a lookup/validation helper, not a CRUD operation.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Use this to discover valid ... values before creating or editing records.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool. No alternatives or when-not scenarios are mentioned, but the read-only nature and use-case are clear.

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