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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds critical pagination behavior: follow nextOffset until null, and never stop at a short page. This goes beyond the annotations and is essential for correct iteration.

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 concise sentences: the first states the purpose and scope; the second delivers a crucial pagination warning. No fluff, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence earns its place.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: scope and pagination protocol. It does not detail the response structure, but the pagination semantics imply nextOffset is in the response. The absence of an explicit output description is a minor gap, but overall the agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 descriptions for both limit and offset. The description adds context on how to use offset (pass nextOffset from the previous response) and clarifies when pagination ends (when nextOffset is null), enhancing the schema's basic parameter descriptions.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'documents', with a specific scope ('created by the user or shared within the account'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_drafts, list_links, and list_templates, which target other resource types.

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 listing documents but does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as list_drafts or list_links. It provides scope ('user or shared within the account') but no direct when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guidance, leaving the agent to infer from the resource name.

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