list_view_sections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds value by detailing the return structure (id, name, views) and clarifying the mixed list behavior of tableViewOrder, which helps the agent understand the data model beyond what annotations cover.

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 three sentences, efficient, and front-loaded with the primary action. However, it could be slightly more concise by omitting the example section names, but overall it is well-structured and no wasted words.

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?

Given the lack of output schema, the description adequately covers the return format and explains the key concept of tableViewOrder. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what the tool returns and how sections relate to views.

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 100% with each parameter already described clearly. The description does not add any additional semantic meaning or examples beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 lists sidebar sections for a table, explains what sections are (user-organized groupings), and specifies the return data (id, name, views inside). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by clarifying the tableViewOrder structure and that views appear inside sections, not in the table's order.

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 for retrieving sections but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_views or how to handle cases where sections are empty. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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