custom_menus_get_custom_menus

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the authentication constraint (agency token) which is useful context, but doesn't elaborate on behavior such as pagination or response structure. With annotations carrying the safety burden, a modest score is appropriate.

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 clean sentence that states the purpose and the key prerequisite, with zero filler. It front-loads the essential information and is highly efficient.

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 read-only listing tool with fully documented parameters and annotations covering safety, the description provides the necessary context: what it does and who can use it. It doesn't need to explain return values since no output schema exists and the operation is straightforward.

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 all 5 parameters are already documented with descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, so it doesn't exceed the baseline for 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 clearly states 'Get Custom Menu Links' with a specific verb and resource, and the parenthetical about agency-level token distinguishes this from location-specific operations. It stands apart from siblings like custom_menus_get_custom_menu_by_id, so purpose is unambiguous.

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 explicitly notes that an agency-level token is required and not a location PIT, which is crucial for correct invocation. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like the get-by-id sibling, but the plural scope and token requirement imply when to use this over other custom menu tools.

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