list_broadcasts

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safe-read profile, so the description is not the primary carrier. It adds the enumeration of possible status values, which is useful context, but says nothing about ordering, pagination behavior, or volume limits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, appropriately sized for a simple list endpoint. It stops short of earning a 5 only because the status list is the sole piece of real 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?

With no output schema, the description could say more about the shape of returned broadcast objects, but it does provide the status vocabulary. For a zero-required-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, this is minimally adequate rather than 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the cursor/limit semantics (including the after-vs-before exclusivity) are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter information, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (broadcasts) and states what is returned (status). It implicitly distinguishes itself from get_broadcast, the singular sibling, though it never names it.

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 indication of when to use this versus get_broadcast or list_emails/list_contacts, and no note on filtering or prerequisite context. The agent must infer that this is the collection-level retrieval.

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