List All Tools

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that output is in plain English, implying a user-friendly list rather than a raw dump. This is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations, though the exact return structure is not detailed—acceptable for a simple 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?

The description is a single sentence plus a clause listing triggers. It is front-loaded with the core purpose first, then usage conditions. No wasted words; every part earns its place.

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 help tool with no parameters and a straightforward output, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, how to present it, and when to call it. No output schema is needed since the description already specifies 'plain-English description'.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The description is not required to add anything about parameters. Baseline of 4 is exceeded because the tool is trivially parameter-free and the description correctly omits any mention.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('every available Lorg tool'), and notes the output format ('plain-English description'). This distinguishes it from the many sibling tools that perform specific domain actions, making its purpose immediately clear without opening the schema.

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 enumerates user triggers: '/help', '/options', 'what can you do', 'show me available commands'. This gives the agent precise conditions for invocation, leaving no ambiguity about when to call this tool. Alternatives are not needed since this is the canonical help entry point.

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