pl_content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds useful behavioral context: return shape (pageInfo + content array with fields), auth ('none needed'), and an example payload. It does not mention pagination details beyond pageInfo, but the provided info is sufficient.

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 compact and front-loaded: one line of purpose, a return shape, a minimal example, and an auth note. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy 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?

For a list/search tool with 8 params and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it covers purpose, filters, return shape, example, and auth. It does not detail pagination fields or error behavior, but that is acceptable for a read-only list tool with rich annotations.

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%, and each parameter already has a descriptive comment. The description names the conceptual filters (content types, entity references, tags) and provides a concrete example, but it does not add extra semantics beyond what the schema already documents. Baseline 3 applies.

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-resource pair ('Content list/search') and clearly states the scope: articles, video, photos, with filtering by content types, entity references, and tags. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pl_content_item (single item) and news/video-specific tools.

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?

Usage is implied through the action 'list/search' and the example 'Latest articles + videos', but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives like pl_content_item or pl_news_latest. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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