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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds the useful context that the output includes steps and enrollment counts, but it does not disclose any other behavioral traits like pagination, ordering, or scope.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately states the tool's function. Every word adds value, making it easy to parse and free of any 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 read-only, zero-parameter list tool, the description covers the core purpose and returned data. However, it lacks any mention of possible filters, ordering, or whether active sequences only are returned, which could be relevant for an agent deciding between this and related sequence tools.

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?

There are no parameters in the input schema, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately focuses on the tool's output rather than parameters, and there is nothing to contradict or clarify.

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 the specific verb 'List' and identifies the exact resource 'drip sequences' with the included details 'steps and enrollment counts.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling list tools like relm_list_automations and relm_list_pipelines.

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 states what the tool does but does not explicitly say when to prefer it over related tools such as relm_list or relm_get_sequence. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the resource name alone.

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