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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful details about cursor-based pagination and the ability to batch by ids, which goes beyond the basic annotations without contradicting them.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that convey the core purpose, actions, and bulk capability without any redundancy or irrelevant 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 list operation, the description covers the essential aspects: listing blocklists, pagination via cursor, and batch retrieval via ids. It lacks details on return structure or filtering options, but given the simplicity and annotations, it is largely complete. The ambiguous 'get' mention slightly reduces completeness.

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 input schema lists all four parameters (id, ids, cursor, account) with basic types, but no descriptions. The tool description explains cursor and ids, but leaves id and account ambiguous. Since schema coverage is complete, baseline is 3, and the description adds value for only some parameters.

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 it lists anti-fraud blocklists in Guru and mentions cursor-based list and id-based get actions, which distinguishes it from the get tool. However, the 'get (id)' phrase might be slightly confusing as it could imply the tool also performs gets, though the tool name clarifies it's the list variant.

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 through the tool name (list vs get) and mentions bulk support with ids, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of guru_blocklists_get or other list tools. It provides only implicit guidance on pagination and batching.

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