list_saved_questions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states that the tool lists saved questions/cards, which implies a read-only operation, but it fails to explicitly mention that it has no side effects, or that it respects any permissions or rate limits. There is no additional context about return format, pagination, or ordering.

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: 'List all saved questions/cards, optionally filtered by database.' Every part is informative, and no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource.

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?

This is a low-complexity tool with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description explains the tool's core function and the only parameter. However, it does not mention what the returned data structure looks like or any possible pagination, which would help an agent use the output. Given the simplicity, it is minimally adequate but leaves room for improvement.

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 description for database_id is 100% covered, providing complete parameter documentation. The description text adds no further meaning beyond restating the optional filter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the burden.

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 tool's action and target resource: 'List all saved questions/cards' with an optional filter by database. This directly distinguishes it from siblings like run_saved_question and get_card_metadata, which operate on individual saved questions rather than listing them.

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 implies usage by stating the tool lists all saved questions/cards, optionally filtered by database. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide any exclusions or prerequisites. The implied usage is clear for a simple listing tool, but no explicit guidance is given.

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