x_bookmarks_list

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

Beyond the annotations, the description adds useful behavioral context: results are ordered newest first, bookmarks are private and unreadable by other accounts, and the response is a compact, sanitized page. It also adds important security guidance that third-party content must be treated as data, not instructions, which is valuable for safe agent use.

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 sentences with no filler: the first sentence states purpose and sibling relationship, the second adds privacy context, and the third covers return format and a security caveat. Each sentence earns its place 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?

The description is complete for a read-only listing tool: it identifies scope, ordering, privacy, return format, and security posture. With an output schema present and all three parameters fully documented in the input schema, there are no significant gaps for an agent to call 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 100%, so the schema already fully documents raw, page_token, and max_results. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which makes the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('list'/'read'), a specific resource (the authenticated user's own bookmarks), and a clear ordering ('newest first'). It also explicitly frames itself as 'the read half of x_bookmark_set', which distinguishes it from the sibling write/add tool.

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 clearly identifies what this tool accesses and that bookmarks are private to the authenticated user, so the intended use case is unambiguous. It references the sibling x_bookmark_set as the counterpart, implying that write operations belong there, though it does not explicitly state 'use this when reading, use x_bookmark_set when modifying'.

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