strapi_list_tutorials

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions 'filtering and pagination', it doesn't describe key behaviors like whether this is a read-only operation, what the return format looks like, error conditions, rate limits, or authentication requirements. For a list tool with 6 parameters and no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List all tutorials') and adds qualifying details ('with filtering and pagination'). There's no wasted verbiage or redundant information, making it appropriately concise for the tool's complexity.

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 the tool has 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., structure of tutorial objects), error handling, or behavioral constraints. For a list operation with multiple filtering options, more context is needed to use it effectively without trial and error.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 6 parameters with descriptions, defaults, and enums. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'filtering and pagination' which loosely relates to some parameters but doesn't provide additional semantic context beyond what's in the schema. This meets the baseline for high 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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('tutorials'), specifying the action and target. It also mentions 'filtering and pagination' which adds useful scope. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling list tools like 'strapi_list_blog_posts' or 'strapi_list_events', which have similar functionality for different resources.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose this over other list tools (e.g., for tutorials specifically) or when to use filtering/pagination features. There's no context about prerequisites, exclusions, or comparisons with sibling tools.

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