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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds the map-item scoping but no further behavioral details.

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 short but redundant: 'List paragraphs.' repeats the guidance that follows. The pipe-delimited 'context: id' fragment is also cryptic and adds clutter.

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, the description adequately states what is returned. It does not mention output format or ordering, but these are not critical for this operation.

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 sole parameter 'id' is already described in the schema as 'Map item id returned by cms_list_maps.' The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond that.

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 specifies the action ('List') and the resource ('body paragraphs for one CMS map item'), which distinguishes it from sibling paragraph-listing tools for articles, events, sounds, and videos.

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 clearly implies when to use it: when needing the body paragraphs of a specific map item. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear.

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