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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: it is scoped to the user's own workspace(s) and requires authentication, which annotations do not express.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the resource and returned fields front-loaded and the routing guidance last. Every clause 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?

An output schema exists, so enumerating return fields is lightly redundant, but the auth prerequisite and workspace scoping fill the remaining gaps. Nothing an agent needs in order to invoke this 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 description coverage is 100% – both 'limit' (range and default 50) and 'query' (case-insensitive substring) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (diagrams) plus scope (published in the user's Line9 workspace(s)) and an enumeration of the returned fields. It explicitly routes to the sibling tool with 'find a diagram before `get_diagram`', so an agent can separate it from get_diagram and render_diagram immediately.

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 a clear use case ('find a diagram before `get_diagram`') and names the follow-up tool, plus a prerequisite ('Requires Line9 sign-in'). It stops short of stating when-not to use it (e.g., when the diagram id is already known), so it is strong but not fully explicit.

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