list_quests

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says 'List quests'. It does not state that the operation is read-only, that results are paginated via the page parameter, or that it is scoped to a campaign. The verb 'list' weakly implies read-only, but no meaningful behavioral context is given.

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 short and free of waste, but this is under-specification, not conciseness. For a tool with two parameters and many siblings, a two-word description does not provide enough information.

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 requires campaignId and offers pagination, yet the description provides no context about return values, campaign scoping, or how this list behaves. With no output schema or annotations, the description is inadequate for an agent to invoke the tool 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters, but it mentions neither campaignId (required) nor page (optional). An agent has no semantic understanding of what these parameters mean beyond their names.

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 quests' is a tautology: it merely restates the tool name 'list_quests' in natural language without adding any scope, filtering, or campaign context. It is not misleading, but it adds no clarifying information beyond what the name already conveys.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool instead of get_quest, search, or list_campaigns, nor does it mention that a campaignId is required.

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