get_supported_circuits

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It mentions no parameters required but does not state if it's read-only or any side effects. Minimal behavioral info, but acceptable for a simple listing tool.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Efficiently conveys purpose, output contents, and usage order.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and guidance. Could mention output format or safety of repeated calls, but it's mostly complete.

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?

No parameters defined; description adds value by explicitly stating 'No parameters required,' which reassures the agent. Baseline 4 for zero-parameter tools with 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?

Clearly states the tool lists all ZK circuits with specific details (verifier addresses and authorized signers). Distinguishes from siblings by being a discovery step before proof generation.

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?

Explicitly says 'Call this first to discover available circuits before starting proof generation,' which guides when to use it. Could be improved by specifying when not to use it or naming alternatives, but it's clear for a discovery tool.

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