get_list_schema_xml

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool exports XML data (a read operation) and mentions its use cases, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or output format specifics. This is adequate but has gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a concise utility statement. Every sentence adds value without waste, making it efficiently structured and appropriately sized.

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?

Given no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is moderately complete. It covers the tool's purpose and usage context but lacks details on parameters, behavioral traits, and output, which are needed for full understanding in this context.

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 input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It implies the parameter 'listName' refers to a SharePoint list or library but does not specify syntax or format. Since there is only one parameter, the baseline is high, but the lack of explicit parameter explanation prevents a perfect score.

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 the specific action ('Export'), resource ('full SharePoint SchemaXml of a list or library'), and scope ('every field, view, content type, and JSON formatting definition'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_list_schema' (which likely returns a simpler schema) and 'create_list_from_xml' (which uses XML to create rather than export).

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 provides clear context for usage ('Useful for backup or cloning'), which implies when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives (e.g., 'get_list_schema' for a simpler schema), keeping it from a perfect score.

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