list_metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists metadata, which implies a read-only operation, but it does not explicitly confirm no side effects, authentication requirements, or rate limits. For a simple listing tool, this is adequate but lacks explicit transparency.

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, direct sentence that immediately states the action and resource. It is front-loaded with the most important information and contains no fluff. Every word contributes meaning, making it highly concise.

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 has no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and its purpose (discover filters). However, it does not describe the output format or any potential limits. For a simple metadata tool, this is sufficient but just shy of 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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds no parameter information because none exist. According to guidelines, 0 parameters gives a baseline of 4. The description does not need to compensate for missing parameter details.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource: 'available custom fields (with their options) and pipeline states'. It explicitly states that these are valid values for filtering, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_leads which list leads, not metadata. The instruction 'Call this first to discover filters' further clarifies its unique role.

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 provides a clear when-to-use directive: 'Call this first to discover filters.' This implies it should be used before utilizing filter parameters in other tools. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, which prevents a top score.

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