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

The description indicates it lists options but does not disclose pagination, filtering, or that it is a read operation. With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it provides basic but not deep behavioral context.

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 short sentences with no redundant information. Every word is necessary and the description is front-loaded with the core action.

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 no output schema and missing annotations, the description could be more complete by hinting at pagination or filter capabilities. However, the schema covers parameters, so the agent can infer details. It is adequate but not fully comprehensive for a 5-param 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 baseline is 3. The description adds domain context by mentioning field types, which adds value beyond the schema parameter descriptions.

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 custom field option values in Greenhouse, specifying they are for single_select and multi_select fields. It distinguishes from sibling 'list_custom_fields' by focusing on field options rather than fields themselves.

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 when to use it (to see available choices for custom fields) but does not provide explicit exclusions or compare to alternatives like 'list_custom_fields'. No guidance on when not to use it.

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