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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and 'for your site' scopes the action, but the description does not mention return format, pagination, or any side effects. This is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks richness.

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?

A single sentence that is immediately front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word serves a purpose, with no filler or redundancy.

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 no parameters and a simple action, the description is nearly complete. It does not describe what is returned, but given the lack of output schema, 'List document collections' sufficiently implies a list of collections. The scope 'for your site' adds necessary context.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is trivially covered at 100%. The description adds no parameter semantics because there are none to describe, which is consistent with the baseline of 4 for 0-parameter tools.

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 a clear resource ('document collections for your site'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It naturally differentiates from sibling tools like create_collection and delete_collection, which perform operations on the same resource.

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 context 'for your site' clarifies that this lists collections within a particular site, but it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it. However, the contrast with sibling tools (create, delete, upsert) makes the usage scenario clear enough for an AI agent.

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