list_endpoints

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It does not explicitly state the tool is read-only, mention authentication, rate limits, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied by 'list' and filter options, but not confirmed.

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?

Two sentences: one defines the output fields, the second gives usage context and links to siblings. No wasted words, front-loaded with purpose.

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, but description lists return fields. Could mention output is an array, but overall adequate for a discovery tool. Provides enough context for usage with siblings.

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 0% per context, so description must compensate. It explains each filter: search (case-insensitive substring), category (omit to see all), mutating (boolean for read-vs-write). Adds value by suggesting to call without args to see categories.

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 it lists API endpoints with specific fields (slug, method, path, etc.) and distinguishes from siblings by guiding the user to first use this tool, then describe_endpoint, then call_endpoint.

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 when to use ('to discover which endpoint to call') and provides a clear workflow with siblings: use this for discovery, describe_endpoint for parameters, call_endpoint to execute.

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