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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds context by specifying ordering (newest-first), bounded page size, and fields excluded (content, embeddings, prompts, etc.), which goes beyond the annotations and clarifies the tool's behavior.

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?

A single, dense sentence that front-loads the key action (List a bounded newest-first page) and then specifies scope and exclusions. Efficient and easy to parse, with no unnecessary words.

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?

The output schema exists, so return details are not needed. The description covers what is included and excluded, plus ordering and scope. It lacks explicit mention of pagination mechanics, but that is implied by 'cursor' in the schema and 'page' in the description.

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 80% (4 of 5 params have descriptions). The description does not elaborate on any parameters, so it relies on the schema. This meets the baseline for high coverage, but does not add extra meaning beyond the schema.

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), the resource (support-document metadata), and the scope (bounded newest-first page in the authenticated Supovia organization). It also distinguishes itself by listing exclusions (content, embeddings, etc.), which sets it apart from search_documents and get_document.

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 implies usage for retrieving metadata without content, and the 'bounded newest-first' aspect suggests pagination. However, it does not explicitly mention when to choose this over search_documents (e.g., 'use search_documents for keyword queries') or provide conditions for not using it.

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