list_kb_docs

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds the token-cost profile and the key behavioral fact that compact mode omits content bodies. It does not mention pagination totals or the size of a 'full' response, which would help an agent avoid a heavy call.

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?

Three short clauses, zero waste, with the default behavior front-loaded before the exception and the alternative. 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?

No output schema exists, and the description does supply the compact return shape (id/name/status/urls, no bodies), which is the critical missing piece an agent needs. Pagination behavior is covered by the schema, so only minor gaps remain.

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 coverage is 100% and the mode enum already documents compact vs full with the 'prefer get_* for one item' hint, so the description largely restates structured data. Baseline 3 is appropriate; page/pageSize semantics are left entirely to the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource plus scope ('for an agent'), and distinguishes itself from get_kb_doc by naming it as the per-document alternative. An agent can separate this from list_kb_docs' siblings (search_kb_docs, get_kb_docs_bulk) without reading the schema.

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?

Explicitly states the default behavior (compact), the condition for escalating (mode=full only if you need every list field), and the alternative for single-document retrieval (get_kb_doc). This is exactly the when/when-not/alternatives pattern.

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