list_automations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns sequences and active participant counts, which is useful, but it does not mention ordering, pagination, status filtering, or any side-effect profile. This is adequate for a simple list tool but leaves some behavioral aspects implicit.

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 exactly two sentences, front-loading the core function ('List multi-step email sequences') and then adding the usage context. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 no-parameter list tool without an output schema, the description covers the main function and the user's goal. It lacks details on response shape or filtering options, but given the simplicity, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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, and the schema description coverage is 100% because the schema is empty. Per the baseline for 0-param tools, a score of 4 applies, and the description appropriately adds no parameter details since none exist.

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 tool lists 'multi-step email sequences' with counts of people in each, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_broadcasts or list_templates by focusing on multi-step sequences and the enrolling context.

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 phrase 'Use this to find the right automation before enrolling someone' provides a clear usage context tied to the sibling enroll_in_automation. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, so it stops short of full exclusionary guidance.

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