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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, establishing a safe read operation. The description adds that view counts and public URLs are returned, providing useful output context, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, or whether all landing pages include unpublished ones.

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, straightforward sentence with no filler words. It efficiently conveys the operation and output fields.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters and no output schema), the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and what it returns. It clearly indicates the resource and key fields, making it complete for its intended purpose.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. According to the rubric, 0 parameters receives a baseline score of 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any missing parameter information.

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 tool lists all landing pages and specifies the return fields (view counts and public URLs). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_landing_page and list_forms, which handle different resources or actions.

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?

The description implies usage when a user needs landing page data, but it provides no explicit alternative guidance or exclusions. Sibling tools like list_forms and list_campaigns cover other resources, but the description does not compare them or state when to prefer this tool.

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