list_modifications

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

The description mentions 'Cached 7d', which is useful behavioral information. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries a higher burden for transparency. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only or any other behavioral traits.

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 concise (one sentence) and front-loads the key purpose. It is efficient, though it could be slightly expanded to include more context without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It defines the input, the action, and caching behavior. For a straightforward list operation, it is adequate.

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%, so the parameter is well-documented in the schema. The description adds context by stating 'for a generation' but does not provide additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already gives.

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 modifications (engine/trim variants) for a generation, which is specific and distinct from sibling tools like list_modifications_by_body. It uses a specific verb and resource.

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 modifications for a generation, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives like list_modifications_by_body. No exclusions or context are given.

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