List built-in agent-service local tools filtered by family, such as skill, files, ambient, state, or approvals. Use to reference available tools when writing SKILL.md tool lists.
List agent-service built-in local tools (skill lifecycle, files, ambient trigger, state, approvals). Use when authoring SKILL.md tools: lists.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| q | No | ||
| limit | No | ||
| family | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| names_only | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. The word 'List' implies a read-only operation and the scope is defined as built-in local tools. Still, it does not disclose response format, pagination behavior, or any constraints beyond the category list.
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 sentence with the primary action and scope front-loaded, followed by a direct usage cue. There is no filler or redundant restating of the tool name.
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?
There is no output schema, no annotations, and five parameters are undocumented. The description gives a good one-line purpose but not enough for an agent to confidently use filtering options or understand what the response will contain.
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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain q, limit, offset, or names_only. The family enum values partially overlap with the categories in the description, but the tool's filtering and output-shaping parameters are left to inference.
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 action ('List') and the resource ('agent-service built-in local tools'), then enumerates the covered categories. This distinguishes it from MCP-related or platform-level list siblings without requiring the agent to inspect schemas.
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?
It gives an explicit use context: 'Use when authoring SKILL.md tools: lists.' This tells the agent when to reach for this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.