list_caslibs

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context such as pagination behavior, default limit interaction, or error handling. Given the annotations, this is acceptable but not additive.

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, clear sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary action and resource, achieving maximum clarity with minimal verbiage.

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 straightforward listing tool, the description is sufficient. The output schema and parameter descriptions cover return values and parameter details. However, it could optionally mention that it is a read-only operation or that the limit parameter controls response size, though these are already covered by annotations and schema.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters (server_id and limit), covering 100% of parameter semantics. The tool description adds nothing beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List') and resource ('CAS libraries (caslibs)') with a specific scope ('available on a CAS server'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_compute_libraries or list_castables by focusing on caslibs, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as list_cas_servers or list_compute_libraries. The description implies usage for listing caslibs but does not mention exclusions, alternate tools, or prerequisite conditions like server availability.

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