list_states

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true and openWorldHint true, so the description's statement of returning a List of State objects adds some context but doesn't disclose pagination, sorting, or other behaviors. It does not contradict annotations.

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 extremely concise, with three short sentences that directly convey the purpose and parameters. Every sentence adds value, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 presence of an output schema (implied by 'Returns: List of State objects'), the description covers the basic purpose and parameters. However, it lacks details on pagination or filtering behavior for the list, which is a common need for such tools.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds meaning by explaining project_id as a UUID and params as optional query parameters as a dictionary. However, it doesn't specify available query parameter keys or values, leaving the agent to guess the full range of options.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all states in a project', which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like retrieve_state (single state) or create_state. It leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like retrieve_state for a single state or list_projects for projects. It lacks context on prerequisites or filtering, leaving the agent to infer usage without explicit help.

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