associations_find_associations

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the sub-account/location scope but does not disclose pagination behavior or return format. Given the annotations, the description provides minimal additional transparency.

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 extremely concise, a single sentence with no fluff. However, it may be too short to convey necessary usage details, but for conciseness it is excellent. Structure is simple and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has required pagination parameters (skip, limit) and an optional locationId, but the description does not explain what associations are, how pagination works, or what the response looks like. With no output schema and minimal description, an agent would lack key information to call this correctly.

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 low (33%)—skip and limit have no descriptions. The description does not explain these parameters or their purpose. locationId is described in the schema, but the description adds nothing about how to use it. The description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 operation (Get) and resource (associations) with a scope (sub-account/location). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like associations_get_association_by_id by indicating it retrieves all associations. However, it does not explicitly name the alternative or clarify what 'associations' refers to in this context.

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 other associations tools or any filtering conditions. It is a one-line statement without alternatives, context, or exclusions.

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