list_addresses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by stating the tool returns specific fields (label, printable address, default flag) and its role in resolving references. It does not contradict annotations and provides sufficient behavioral context for a read-only operation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and output, followed by a usage hint. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains the returned fields (label, printable address, default flag) and provides a clear use case. No additional information (e.g., pagination) is necessary for typical usage.

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 coverage is 100% with one parameter described. The tool description does not provide additional semantics about the 'intent' parameter beyond what the schema already states. The parameter description itself is more about usage guidelines than parameter details, but the schema carries the burden. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 saved DoorDash addresses with specific fields (label, printable address, default flag). It also provides context for its use (resolving 'home'/'work' references), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_payment_methods or set_default_address.

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 specifies when to use the tool: to resolve address references like 'home'/'work'. It also notes that delivery always uses the account default address, implying the agent should check the default flag. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives such as set_default_address.

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