list_sparks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It adds useful context about the 30-day lifespan and that results include insight and expiry date, but it does not clarify whether expired Sparks are included or how the limit parameter affects results. These gaps make it adequate but not richly transparent.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and a parenthetical definition. No filler or redundant wording.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential semantics: what a Spark is, what the list contains, and a key field. However, it omits mention of the limit parameter's behavior and possible inclusion of expired items, so it is not fully complete.

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 input schema already documents the single 'limit' parameter with its default (20), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The description does not repeat or expand on this, so it adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('List') and resource ('your Sparks'), and clarifies what Sparks are ('bookmarks you have read, with 30-day lifespan'), distinguishing them from sibling tools like list_vault. It clearly conveys the tool's scope.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus search_sparks or list_vault, nor are there any exclusions or alternative suggestions. The description only states what the tool does, not when it is preferred.

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