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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safe, repeatable read profile is covered. The description adds that filters are optional and what fields come back, but says nothing about result size, pagination, or ordering — modest added value over the annotations.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose and filter scope front-loaded and the discovery-use hint appended. 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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details need not be spelled out, and the description still notes title/description are included. For a 2-parameter, read-only, zero-required listing tool this is nearly complete; only pagination/result-size behavior is unaddressed.

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 coverage is 50%: lang has only "Default en." while section is undocumented in the schema. The description re-lists the section enum values (docs, blog, changelog, core) that the schema already provides and mentions language filtering, but adds no new syntax, defaults, or behavior beyond the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (pages), names the source (aidata.stream), and specifies the returned fields (title and description). This makes it clearly distinct from get_page (single page) and search_site (query-based) without opening either schema.

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?

"Good first call to see what documentation exists" gives clear context for when to reach for this tool as a discovery entry point. It does not, however, explicitly exclude or name alternatives like search_site for targeted lookups, so it stops short of full when-not guidance.

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