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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context that results are scoped to the current workspace and ordered newest first, plus a definition of a digest, though it does not explain pagination or limit behavior beyond what the schema shows.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by a useful definition of a digest. The definition earns its place by clarifying the resource, though the sentence could potentially be trimmed.

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?

With rich annotations and an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It gives enough context for a list operation: scope, ordering, and filtering. The main remaining gap is lack of detail on the limit parameter, which the schema partially covers with bounds.

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 description coverage is 50%: the type parameter already has a schema description, while limit has none. The description adds that type acts as a filter and gives an example, but it does not compensate for the undocumented limit parameter.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it lists digests for the workspace, newest first, and defines what a digest is. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this list tool from the sibling get_digest, which retrieves a single digest.

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?

It indicates that results can be filtered by type, such as daily_digest, which implies a browsing use case. It does not say when to use this instead of get_digest or search tools, and it offers no exclusions or prerequisites.

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