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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds value beyond them: deterministic ordering, the fields returned per list, and that the call is 'Free' (a cost signal agents cannot infer from annotations). It does not discuss pagination behavior beyond limit, leaving a small gap.

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 compact sentences with zero filler, and the most important information (what is listed, ordering, returned fields) is front-loaded before the usage hint.

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?

With no output schema, the description responsibly enumerates the returned fields (id, name, building count, last-changed, app link) and the ordering, so an agent knows what it will get back. Minor omissions remain around pagination/empty-result behavior, but the core is well covered for a simple two-param read tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so both limit and nameContains are fully documented in the schema, which establishes a baseline of 3. The description adds no syntax, range, or matching semantics beyond what the schema already states (e.g., it never mentions nameContains or its substring behavior).

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 and resource ('Lists the lead lists in the user's baseray workspace') plus scope details: ordering (most recently changed first) and the exact fields returned. It also implicitly separates itself from save_buildings_to_lead_list by noting it is for finding an id to save buildings into.

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 usage context: 'Use to show the user's lists or to find the id of an existing list to save buildings into,' which routes the agent from save_buildings_to_lead_list. No explicit when-not or exclusion conditions are stated, so it stops short of a 5.

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