planist_list_pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states 'List all accessible pages', clearly implying a read-only operation, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, or any additional side effects. This is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks depth.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no redundant or extra information. Every word contributes value.

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 simple listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope. It could mention return structure, but that is not strictly necessary for such a straightforward operation.

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 only parameter, kindFilter, has a complete description in the schema. The tool description enumerates the page types (docs, sheet, slide, edgeless, design, dashboard), which aligns with the parameter's allowed values but does not add extra semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 identifies the action (List), the resource (pages), and the scope (all accessible pages in the Planist project workspace). It also enumerates supported page types, distinguishing it from sibling tools like planist_read_page and planist_list_variables.

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 usage: call this when you need to see all accessible pages in the workspace. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the tool's purpose is distinct enough from siblings that context is clear.

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