List document tabs

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful context by stating that no content is returned, that the result is a nested tree, and that the Docs API cannot modify tab structure—which goes beyond the annotation hints. Slightly more detail about response shape or pagination would push it higher, but it is already strong.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core return value comes first, followed by practical usage guidance and a crucial limitation note. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is easy for an agent to parse.

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 single-parameter, read-only discovery tool with strong annotations and a clear description, nothing essential is missing. The agent learns what the tool returns, which fields to expect, how to use the output with sibling tools, and a key API limitation.

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 single parameter document_id is 100% covered by the input schema with a clear explanation of where to find the id. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it does not repeat or conflict with the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full schema 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 states a specific action and resource: returns the document's tab tree without content, listing tabId, title, position index, and nested childTabs. This clearly distinguishes it from content-reading tools like read_document_text and from editing tools.

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?

It explicitly instructs to use tabId values to target specific tabs in read_document_text and every editing tool, establishing when to call this tool first. The NOTE also clarifies that tab creation/rename/delete/reorder is UI-only, telling the agent what this tool cannot do and preventing misuse.

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