list_view_sections

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the return shape (list of {index, title, heading, card_count}) and a key error condition ('Errors if the view is not a sections view'). It does not explicitly state read-only behavior, but 'List' strongly implies no mutation.

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 well-structured with a clear summary, usage rationale, parameter explanations, and return/error behavior. Every sentence contributes value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 read-only listing tool with two optional parameters, the description covers purpose, when to use it, parameter semantics, return format, and error behavior. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to detail return values further, and nothing essential is missing.

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 fully compensates. It explains `url_path` as the dashboard URL path or None for the default dashboard, and `view` as the target view by index or matching path/title. This adds meaning that the raw schema does not provide.

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 a specific action ('List the sections of a sections-type dashboard view') and resource. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings by explaining that sections-type views store cards inside sections, not a top-level card list, which is important context for card tools.

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 gives clear usage context: use it to discover which section to target with the card tools' `section` argument. It implies this is not for non-sections views, but it does not name explicit alternatives or enumerate when not to use it.

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