list-annotation-configs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It indicates a read-only operation ('list') but does not mention safety, side effects, or any constraints beyond the limit parameter. The example implies non-destructive behavior, but more transparency is needed.

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 efficient with 4 sentences covering purpose, definition, example, and return. It is front-loaded and lacks fluff, but the example is simplistic and could be more informative.

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 explains the return type as an array of config objects and defines configs, but does not detail the fields within each object (e.g., name, type). The limit parameter is not explained. For a simple list tool, it is marginally adequate but has gaps.

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 0%, yet the description does not explain the 'limit' parameter. The agent only gets schema constraints (default 100, max 500) but no semantic meaning. The description adds no value beyond the schema, failing to compensate for low 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 'List Phoenix annotation configs' with a specific verb and resource. It defines what annotation configs are and expected return, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list-prompts or list-datasets.

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 an example usage but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., get-span-annotations). It's implied that one uses it to view all configs, but lacks when-not or alternative directions.

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