engagement_details_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states this is a list operation with filtering, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose pagination behavior (limit/offset usage), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what 'engagements' encompass. For a tool with 5 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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?

Extremely concise with a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information or fluff.

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 5 parameters with 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema, and complex sibling tools (like engagement_details_get), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'engagements' are, how results are returned, or provide enough context for effective tool selection and use.

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 mentions 'optional filtering' but doesn't explain what parameters are available or their purposes (e.g., limit for pagination, startTime/endTime for date ranges, activityTypes for filtering). The description adds minimal value beyond the bare schema.

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 action ('List') and resource ('engagements'), and specifies optional filtering. It doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'engagement_details_get' or 'engagement_details_get_associated', but provides a specific, non-tautological purpose.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'engagement_details_get' (for single engagement) or 'engagement_details_get_associated' (for related engagements). The description mentions optional filtering but doesn't explain when filtering is appropriate or what 'engagements' represent in this context.

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