list_todo_lists

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description's 'List all' aligns with this but adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide—such as pagination, ordering, or authorization requirements. No contradiction with 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: one sentence for the purpose and a brief Args section. Every word earns its place, with no filler or repetition.

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 (single required parameter, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does and what input is needed. It doesn't discuss edge cases, but none are critical for a straightforward read-only list operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It restates the parameter name and calls project_id 'numeric,' which merely repeats the schema's type 'integer.' It adds minimal meaning beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all to-do lists for a project'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_todo_list (singular) and list_todo_items (items). It lacks an explicit mention of alternatives, but the scope is clear.

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 when to use the tool (to retrieve all to-do lists for a given project) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to related tools like get_todo_list. It gives the required context (project_id) but no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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