list_assets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the status filter but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, how pagination works, or any access control implications of 'private' assets. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what the name suggests.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler content. It conveys the core purpose and the most important filter option efficiently.

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 tool's simplicity and the existence of an output schema, the description is adequate but misses pagination semantics and a clearer definition of 'private assets'. This leaves some gaps for an agent unfamiliar with the domain, but the core list operation is clear.

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 provides no descriptions for page, size, or status, and the description only explains the status parameter (with allowed values). The page and size parameters are entirely undocumented, leaving users to infer their purpose from naming conventions.

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 resource ('private assets'), and specifies an optional status filter with enumerated values. This differentiates it from sibling tools like get_asset (single asset retrieval) and list_voices (different resource).

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 it is used for listing assets, but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like get_asset or upload_asset. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned, so usage context is only implied.

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