List Labels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds real behavioral context: labels carry no access rights so the whole organization is returned, and the response is a tree with id/name/path/parentId/children. Missing only pagination or ordering behavior for a potentially large list.

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?

Front-loads the usage trigger, then the return shape, then the cross-tool note about `spaces`/`labels` on list_niches. Dense but every sentence carries information; the final sentence is mildly tangential but still helps an agent connect ids to niches.

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?

With no output schema and no parameters, the description fully carries the burden: it documents the tree node fields, explains the access model, and points to consumer tools. Nothing an agent needs to call and use the result is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantic burden and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no filtering options exist by stating all organization labels are returned.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list labels) and immediately disambiguates from siblings by naming the tools that consume the returned ids (add_niche_labels, remove_niche_labels, list_niches, list_rank_radars). An agent can tell exactly what this tool is for without inspecting the schema.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('use this first when the user talks about labels') and a second concrete case (resolving ids for downstream tools), naming the specific alternative tools that require those ids. This is when-to-use plus routing information, not just implied usage.

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