doc_list_pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the 'PRO+ plan' prerequisite but does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, or explicitly confirm read-only status. The verb 'list' implies a read operation, but this is implicit rather than stated.

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 extremely concise: 'List all doc pages. PRO+ plan.' Every word is meaningful and the core action is front-loaded. No unnecessary information or repetition, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 simplicity of a zero-parameter list tool, the description provides the essential action, but it lacks context on what constitutes a 'doc page', whether it is scoped to a workspace, and what the output looks like. Since there is no output schema, the description could have provided more context to make the tool fully usable.

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, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter details because none exist. This is appropriate given no parameter semantics to clarify.

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 'List all doc pages' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly stating the tool lists all doc pages. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like search_docs or write_docs, but the scope 'all' provides some differentiation. This is clear but lacks explicit sibling comparison.

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 is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_docs or doc_outline. The only additional context is 'PRO+ plan', which is a constraint, not a usage recommendation. There is no mention of when not to use it or what scenarios favor this tool.

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