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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It adds the scope 'active and historical,' indicating the range of states covered, which is useful. However, it does not mention pagination, the state filter parameter, or clarify the read-only nature beyond the word 'List.' The description is not misleading but lacks depth.

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 a single, clear sentence with no filler words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded with the main action.

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?

While the tool is relatively simple and the schema documents most parameters, there is no output schema and the description does not mention return format or how the state filter interacts with the 'active and historical' claim. It is adequate for a basic list tool but lacks enough context to fully understand behavior without additional inference.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the role of automationId by saying 'for an automation' but does not add meaning to state, page, or pageSize beyond what the schema already provides. The phrase 'active and historical' hints at the state parameter but does not explain its enum values.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the exact resource 'enrollments for an automation,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_automations or get_automation. The scope is explicit and unambiguous.

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 (when you need enrollments for a specific automation), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_automations or provide any exclusions. No comparative guidance is given.

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