list_plists

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds only 'from common locations' and the scope values, without explaining what locations are scanned, whether any permissions are needed, or whether the operation is strictly read-only. This is minimal 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?

The description is concise: one action sentence plus a compact Args line. It is front-loaded with the operation and then presents the only parameter, with no redundant or filler text.

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?

The tool is simple, has an output schema, and the parameter values are stated, so an agent can likely invoke it correctly. However, 'common locations' is left vague and there is no context about when to prefer this tool over sibling tools, making it only partially 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?

The schema provides only a string property 'scope' with a default, but the description explicitly lists the allowed values 'all', 'system', or 'user'. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this compensation is valuable and gives an agent the key choices for the parameter, even if the exact meaning of each scope is not fully expanded.

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') and a clear resource ('launchd plist files'), with the scope parameter refining the target. It is naturally distinguished from sibling tools like list_services and print_service, which concern services rather than plist files.

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 when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The description only says what the tool does and lists scope values; it does not help an agent decide between list_plists and related sibling tools.

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