List Status Pages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavior of returning all configured status pages and specifies the returned fields, but it does not explicitly state that it is read-only or mention any authentication requirements. The verb 'Returns' implicitly signals no side effects, which is sufficient for a simple list 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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action ('Returns all configured status pages') and then enumerates the relevant fields. There is no redundant or extraneous information.

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 simplicity (no parameters), the presence of an output schema, and the description's enumeration of returned fields, the description provides sufficient context. Any missing details are likely covered by the output schema, so the description is complete for this use case.

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, so there is no parameter schema to elaborate on. The description adds value by clarifying the return fields, which is not parameter semantics but still supports the baseline score of 4.

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 opens with 'Returns all configured status pages', a specific verb+resource, and explicitly enumerates the data fields (slug, title, visibility, custom domain settings). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling getStatusPage, which would retrieve a single page.

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 clearly indicates that this tool lists all status pages, providing context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives such as getStatusPage or any exclusions, so while the intent is clear, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it.

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