Lists project context stores for cloud agents, returning a page of stores and an optional page token to continue. Use it to discover available context stores before reading or managing agent data.
Extended: Project Context stores (ListAgentStores).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pageToken | No | Page token |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It provides no information about pagination, authentication, side effects, or return behavior beyond the implicit listing implied by the name.
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 very short but consists of an under-specified fragment; 'Extended' does not add useful meaning. Brevity here reflects missing content rather than efficient front-loading.
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?
For a list operation over project context stores, the description omits what a store is, how results relate to agents, and pagination behavior. No annotations or output schema compensate for these 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 100%, and the single pageToken parameter is documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 merely restates the tool name in parentheses and labels it 'Extended', without a clear verb or scope. It does not distinguish this operation from siblings like list_agents or list_workspace_files.
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?
There is no indication of when to use this tool rather than list_agents, list_workspace_files, or read_store_file. No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.