list_lists

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It declares the tool is read-only and describes the return structure, which is sufficient for a simple list retrieval tool. No negative behaviors or prerequisites are mentioned, but none are needed.

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, no wasted words. The first sentence establishes purpose, the second provides actionable details. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use the results. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 zero parameters, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. The description adds value by explaining the return object structure (uuid, name, role) and how to use the uuid subsequently. Baseline is 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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 shopping lists/pantries for the authenticated user, specifies it's read-only, and details the return fields (uuid, name, role). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on individual items or recipes.

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 explicitly mentions using the returned uuid as listId for other tools, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, but the purpose is sufficiently clear from the sibling tool names.

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