List trash

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety is known. The description adds the trash scope but does not disclose pagination behavior or return format. No contradiction.

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 clear sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and subject effectively.

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?

The tool is simple, but with optional pagination and keyword filtering parameters and no output schema, the description does not fully clarify how these parameters affect results or what the response structure is. It is minimally adequate.

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 schema descriptions cover page and page_size, but keyword has no description. The tool description adds no parameter semantics, leaving the purpose of keyword ambiguous. Schema coverage is 67%, not high enough to fully compensate.

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 profiles currently in the trash (recycle bin)' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (trash profiles). It distinguishes from sibling tool list_profiles by explicitly scoping to trash.

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 implies this tool is for viewing trashed profiles but does not explicitly state when to use it versus list_profiles or other trash-related tools like restore_from_trash. Usage context is implied by the phrase 'in the trash'.

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