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

Annotations already mark this as readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: the default sort order ('newest first') and the pagination semantics ('hasMore: true means more items exist'). This helps the agent anticipate response behavior and decide how to iterate, with no contradiction.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, the sibling pointer comes second, and the pagination caveat third. Every sentence adds actionable information.

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 an output schema present, return values are already documented. The description covers ordering, pagination behavior, and the alternative tool for detail retrieval. For a list operation with full schema coverage and safe annotations, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful guidance for nextPageToken ('pass nextPageToken only when every item is needed') and implicitly mentions narrowing filters, which enriches the parameter usage beyond the schema's bare 'Opaque cursor' description. It does not repeat parameter docs, which is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the workspace's classifiers, newest first', and immediately disambiguates from the sibling tool by adding '(classify group)' and pointing to get_classifier for fetching a single classifier's config. This lets an agent distinguish it from list_classifier_versions and get_classifier without opening schemas.

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?

It explicitly names the alternative (get_classifier) and the condition that selects it ('Fetch a specific one's config'). It also gives pagination guidance: prefer narrowing filters over paginating, and pass nextPageToken only when every item is needed. This is clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance beyond what annotations or schema provide.

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