list_reviews

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. Discloses default sort, output fields (star rating, title, body, etc.), and mention of existing developer response. Does not discuss rate limits or auth, but as a read operation, these are less critical.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with zero fluff. Each sentence adds essential information: purpose, output details, and cross-reference to sibling.

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 no output schema, description compensates by listing output fields. Parameter details are covered by schema. Tool is straightforward; description is complete enough for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds value by elaborating on default sort ('newest first') and output fields, which help understand parameter effects (e.g., sort parameter).

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?

Clearly states it lists customer reviews, specifying 'for an app' and 'newest first by default'. Distinguishes from siblings by mentioning the response id can be used with delete_review_response.

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?

Explicitly describes the tool's purpose and links to sibling tools via response id usage. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative scenarios, but context is clear enough.

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