acedatacloud_list_sites

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation through the verb 'list', but it does not explicitly state that no data is modified, nor does it mention rate limits, authentication, or potential side effects. The lack of any additional transparency information makes it incomplete.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary details or redundancies. It is perfectly concise and easy to parse, avoiding any verbosity while still conveying the core purpose.

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 description is too sparse to be complete. It does not indicate what the returned data looks like (even though an output schema exists, it is not provided in the description), nor does it mention pagination behavior, default values, or how to handle large result sets. It lacks the contextual information needed for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 schema includes 'limit' and 'offset' for pagination, but the description provides no explanation of these parameters. Since the schema itself has no descriptions, the description should clarify their purpose and constraints. It does not, leaving the agent to infer their meaning, which is insufficient.

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 action (list) and the resource (sites), with the qualifier 'caller-visible' providing scope. It distinguishes from other list tools in the sibling set by specifying the resource. However, it is minimal and could benefit from a bit more detail about what constitutes a 'site', but it is not misleading.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any specific use case, prerequisites, or how it differs from other site-related tools. There is no mention of filtering, sorting, or when to prefer this over similar list operations.

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