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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces 'Read-only.' It adds behavioral context about optional filtering and provides the underlying GraphQL query signature, which gives the agent insight into the API mapping beyond the annotation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundant information. The GraphQL signature is compact and adds value without bloat.

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 list tool with all-optional parameters, the description covers the essential behavior: listing documents with optional filters. The read-only annotation and schema fill in remaining details. The GraphQL signature adds extra context, though the unexplained 'should_paginate' is a minor omission.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all four parameters. The description lists the same parameter names in the GraphQL signature but does not add new semantic detail. The mention of 'should_paginate' in the GraphQL is extraneous and could be confusing since it's not in the input schema.

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 'List documents' with optional scoping by patient or keyword. The verb 'list' and resource 'documents' are specific, and the scoping options distinguish it from sibling list tools for other resources.

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 provides clear context on when to use: when listing documents, optionally filtered by viewable_user_id or keyword. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific nature makes the intended use apparent.

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