list_available_views

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It minimally discloses behavior (listing view endpoints with metadata) but does not mention read-only nature, idempotency, or rate limits. Given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, both essential and without superfluous words. It is front-loaded with the key action and purpose.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimal. It states what it does but does not describe the return structure or what metadata is included. For a simple list endpoint, it is adequate but lacks detail that would help an agent interpret results.

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 tool has no parameters, so the description adds no parameter information. Per guidelines, zero parameters yields a baseline score of 4. The description does not need to elaborate further.

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 action 'Get a list of all available DiVA API view endpoints with metadata' and the purpose 'discovering available data sources'. It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools that retrieve specific data (e.g., get_cards, get_balances) by focusing on listing available views.

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 for discovery before using other view-specific endpoints, but does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives or when not to use. For a simple enumeration tool, the context is clear enough.

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