wattpad_list_my_works

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description adds value by disclosing the failure-handling behavior (explicitly stating errors instead of silently returning only published works) and outlining the return content. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes a separate returns section. It is slightly verbose with the failure note and return format but every sentence earns its place.

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 an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description adds useful return-format details and error behavior. It does not mention pagination or exact metrics, but the output schema likely covers those, making the description adequate.

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 all three parameters are already documented. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, though it reiterates the include_drafts and default username behavior. Baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the tool lists an author's stories, including drafts of the authenticated account, with a specific verb ('Lista') and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like wattpad_get_story (single story) and wattpad_search_stories (search), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 implies the primary use case (listing an author's works) and notes the default behavior (authenticated account) and the include_drafts option. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the context and sibling list make it clear when this tool applies.

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