List shares

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety is covered; the description adds nothing further. It says nothing about whether results are paginated, what share types (user/group/link) are returned, or how large the listing may be for an open-world operation.

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 three-word sentence with zero waste and the resource front-loaded. It is arguably under-specified rather than bloated, which is penalized elsewhere.

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 zero-parameter read tool with rich safety annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. An agent still lacks any signal about return shape, pagination, or share types, which matters for an open-world listing call.

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 takes zero parameters and the schema is fully specified, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description's word "all" usefully signals that no filtering arguments exist.

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?

"List all shares" states a specific verb and resource, which is clearly distinct from mutation siblings such as nextcloud_create_share and nextcloud_delete_share. It does not, however, differentiate itself from read siblings like nextcloud_list_contents or nextcloud_list_files, which in Nextcloud may also surface share information.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus its many list siblings, and no mention of whether the listing is paginated, filtered, or scoped. The agent must infer everything about invocation context from the tool name alone.

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