wrike_list_custom_statuses

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'List all custom statuses', which adds little beyond the tool name. It does not mention read-only behavior, pagination, ordering, or any constraints, so an agent cannot infer important behavioral traits.

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 unnecessary words. It is concise and directly states the action and target.

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 zero-parameter list tool, the description is minimally sufficient: it clearly states the action and scope ('all'). However, it does not describe the return format, potential edge cases (e.g., archived statuses), or any caveats, making it less complete for an agent expecting more context.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline score is 4. The description correctly avoids parameter explanations, as there is nothing to explain.

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 the specific verb 'List' and resource 'custom statuses', clearly stating the tool lists all custom statuses. It distinguishes from sibling tools such as get_custom_status (single) and create/update/delete operations by clearly indicating a bulk read operation.

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: 'List all custom statuses' tells the agent when to use this tool (when a full list is needed). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'for a single status, use get_custom_status', leaving some ambiguity for an agent choosing between similar tools.

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