List Twenty CRM records

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. Description adds behavioral details about filters, ordering, depth, and pagination, but these are limited and partially redundant with annotations. No contradictions, but the additional context is moderate.

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?

Single sentence of 13 words, front-loaded with the core action and followed by key capabilities. No filler or redundant content. Efficiently communicates the tool's essence.

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?

Given 8 parameters, no output schema, and moderate annotations, the description covers the basic purpose but omits details like pagination parameters (ending_before, starting_after), response_format options, and return structure. Leaves several aspects unexplained, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 50%, leaving half of parameters without schema descriptions. The description mentions 'filters, ordering, relation depth, and cursor pagination' which loosely cover filter, order_by, depth, and pagination parameters, but does not provide explicit semantics or details for individual parameters. Baseline is 3 given moderate coverage.

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 the action 'List records' and the resource 'any supported Twenty object', with specific features like filters, ordering, relation depth, and cursor pagination. It distinguishes from mutation siblings by noting it's read-only, but does not explicitly differentiate from twenty_search_records which may also list/search, preventing a top score.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like twenty_search_records. Does not specify use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The description lacks explicit context for choosing this tool over siblings.

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