get_all_classes

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only mentions pagination without explaining the behavior of offset and count. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, has side effects, or respects any project state.

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, concise and front-loaded, but omits critical details that would earn its place. It is efficient but sacrifices completeness.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not explain return values. However, it lacks context about pagination behavior and parameter constraints, making it incomplete for effective use.

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%, so the description should explain the parameters. It only says 'pagination support', leaving the meaning of 'offset' and 'count' ambiguous. The defaults are not mentioned in the description, relying on 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 the tool returns all classes with pagination support, distinguishing it from more specific class lookup tools like get_class_source or search_classes_by_keyword. However, it could better specify the scope of 'all classes' and differentiate from potential sibling tools like fetch_current_class.

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 this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_classes_by_keyword) is provided. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or when pagination is necessary.

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