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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the grouping and content but doesn't mention pagination, error handling, or auth requirements. It's a simple read operation but lacks behavioral details.

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, front-loaded with the main action and content, second sentence gives usage context. No redundant 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?

For a simple listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It covers purpose, usage, and parameter context. Could mention when to use describe_anthid_endpoint instead, but not critical.

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%, so the schema already documents the 'service' parameter. The description adds context that it's for filtering by group but doesn't add syntax or format details beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific verb 'list', resource 'endpoints', and details 'grouped by service, with its method, path, and summary'. Clearly distinguishes from siblings like search_anthid_api and describe_anthid_endpoint by specifying exhaustive listing vs searching or describing.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to see the shape of the API before searching it', providing a clear context. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, so not a 5.

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