basecoat_list_charts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description only adds the catalog size ('50+') and the stage label; it does not disclose return shape, pagination, or match behavior. Adequate but thin on behavioral context.

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 front-loaded sentences with a clear action statement followed by the next-step directive; nothing is wasted. The '[STAGE 3: SYNTAX & STACKS]' prefix is moderately useful workflow scaffolding but borders on meta-clutter.

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 read-only listing tool with full param coverage and safety annotations, the definition supplies the essential action, filters, and next step. It omits what a returned 'blueprint' record contains, but the routing to get_chart_blueprint largely compensates.

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 100%, so all six parameters (including the id/componentId aliases and query/search aliases) are already documented in the schema. The description restates the category enum and mentions keyword search but adds no syntax, format, or precedence rules beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb pair ('List and filter') and a concrete resource ('50+ Basecoat ApexCharts and SVG data visualization blueprints') with the filter axes named (category, keyword). It is clearly distinguished from the sibling basecoat_get_chart_blueprint, which it explicitly frames as the follow-up step.

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?

Gives explicit workflow routing: 'Next step: Call basecoat_get_chart_blueprint with the selected chart ID,' so the agent knows what comes after this tool. It does not state when NOT to use it or contrast it with search_components/list_blocks, so no exclusion guidance, but the routing is clear.

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