list_equipment

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that results are cached for 7 days, a useful behavioral trait. However, it does not mention return format, error handling, or permissions needed.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted words. The action 'List equipment trims' is front-loaded, and caching info is appended efficiently.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and caching. However, it lacks detail on what data is returned (e.g., fields in each trim) and does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'list_options'.

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% and the parameter 'modification_id' is described in the schema as 'Modification id.'. The description adds 'for a modification' which reinforces the parameter's role but does not add significant new semantics beyond the schema.

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 'List equipment trims for a modification' with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('equipment trims'), and it is distinct from sibling tools like 'list_options' or 'list_colors' by specifying 'trims'. The additional caching info ('Cached 7 days') adds context.

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 usage when needing equipment trims for a modification, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'list_options' or 'list_modifications'. No when-not or exclusion criteria are provided.

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