dspace_list_communities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing beyond the fact that it is a read: no auth/permission requirements, no pagination default behavior, no indication of whether results are limited or how many are returned. For a repo-listing call with zero annotation coverage this is a real gap.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It says exactly what the tool is and nothing more, which is structurally ideal for a simple list operation.

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 trivial paginated list with a fully documented input schema and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It stops short of telling the agent anything about result shape, ordering, or how it differs from sibling listing tools, which leaves the definition merely adequate.

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?

Both parameters (page, size) have 100% schema description coverage and the description adds no format or default-value detail beyond them. With the schema doing all the work and no parameters required, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb (List) and resource (communities) with the scope qualifier 'top-level', so the operation itself is unambiguous. However, it never distinguishes itself from the close sibling dspace_list_collections or dspace_list_workspace_items, which an agent could easily confuse with it.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance. The agent is left to infer that this is a browsing/entry-point call rather than a search, and must guess how it relates to dspace_search and dspace_list_collections.

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