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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It does add some value by stating the sort order ('newest first') and the auth requirement, but it omits other useful behavioral context such as pagination behavior, default result limits, or whether the operation is strictly read-only.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and includes only one extra relevant behavioral note (auth requirement), making every word purposeful.

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 only two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, the ordering, and the auth requirement. It could be more complete by mentioning pagination or return format, but the tool's low complexity means this level is largely sufficient.

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%, and the input schema already documents both parameters ('max results' and 'optional smart-account filter'). The description itself does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('List delegations') and the specific resource ('delegations'), adding useful ordering information ('newest first'). This distinguishes it from singular sibling tools like get_delegation and other list_* tools for different resources.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_delegation, renew_delegation, or revoke_delegation. It only mentions that auth is required, which is a prerequisite rather than a usage condition.

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