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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this returns lightweight metadata only, excludes props, includes size hints, and avoids pulling full content. This meaningfully describes behavior, though it does not detail pagination, ordering, or exact fields.

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 deliver the key facts with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the use-case guidance is placed immediately after.

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 one-parameter list operation, the description is largely complete: it states what is returned and why to use it. However, with no output schema and no annotations, some specifics about the returned metadata fields or limits are left unspecified.

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 input schema covers 100% of the single parameter with a clear description ('The UUID of the page'). The tool description does not add parameter-level detail, but the schema already provides sufficient meaning, so the 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('lightweight block metadata (no props) for a page, including size hints'). It clearly differentiates from the sibling list_blocks by noting that it excludes props and does not pull full content.

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 phrase 'Use this to discover blocks without pulling full content' gives a clear intended use case and implies the alternative of fetching full content. It does not explicitly name sibling tools or state when not to use it, but the context is strong.

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