list_resources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states it lists resources with pagination and 'enhanced metadata', but does not disclose any behavioral traits like performance impact, authorization needs, or what 'enhanced metadata' entails. The description is insufficient for safe and effective use.

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 concise sentence (8 words) and front-loaded with the main action. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices informative value; a bit more detail would improve it 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 tool has 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is minimally viable but leaves gaps. It does not clarify what 'enhanced metadata' means or the scope of 'resources'. The output schema exists, so return values don't need explanation, but the description still lacks context about the tool's domain (APK resources).

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions pagination (aligns with 'count' and 'offset') but does not add meaning beyond the schema's field descriptions. No param-specific explanations are added.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'resources', and adds features 'pagination support and enhanced metadata'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_resource_file and list_smali_files, though it could be more specific about what constitutes a 'resource' in this 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_resource_file for a single resource, or list_smali_files). The description lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use information.

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