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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds two genuinely new facts beyond annotations: the result ordering (most recently saved first) and that the call is free, but says nothing about pagination limits beyond the schema or what a returned creator record contains.

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 resource and scope, with no redundant restatement of the title. The terse 'Free.' fragment is unusual but conveys a distinct, decision-relevant fact without padding.

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 read-only, zero-required-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, this is close to sufficient. The gap is that with no output schema, the description does not indicate what each saved creator entry includes or whether paging metadata is returned.

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% with clear descriptions for both page and limit including the default of 20, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no paging guidance or advice on using limit to bound results, so baseline 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 ('Lists') plus a precisely scoped resource ('creators on the account's saved list'), which distinguishes it from browse_creators and search_creators by scope alone. It also states ordering ('most recently saved first'), though it never names a sibling for contrast.

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 'saved list' scoping implies when to use it (retrieving previously saved creators rather than searching), and 'Free' signals a cost advantage over credit-consuming siblings like reveal_contact or unlock_creator. However, no explicit when-not or named alternative is given.

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