list_namespaces

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. The description implies a read operation ('List'), but does not explicitly state it is read-only, mention consequences, or disclose any restrictions. Given the simplicity, it is adequate but lacks explicit 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 two sentences, each adding value: first states the purpose, second describes the parameter. No extraneous words, front-loaded, and efficient.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the action and the argument. However, it could clarify what 'used' means (e.g., namespaces with at least one key) and confirm return type (though output schema exists).

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema for the single parameter 'project_id' by describing it as 'The numeric ID of the project.' This clarifies its purpose, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 all used namespaces in a Tolgee project. The verb 'list' and resource 'namespaces' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling list tools (e.g., list_keys, list_languages) by naming the 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?

No guidance on when to use vs alternatives. The description only states what it does and the argument, omitting any context about when it is appropriate (e.g., to get an overview of namespaces) or when other tools like get_project or search_keys might be more suitable.

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