list_circles

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers substantial disclosure: archived circles are excluded by default, the status='archived' override, pagination behavior, auth requirements, and a note that start_login will not grant access. This goes well beyond what the schema conveys.

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 short paragraphs with every sentence earning its place: purpose first, then default behavior/override, pagination, and the access note that prevents repeated failed invocation attempts. No fluff or repetition of schema content.

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?

Covers the operational essentials for a filter-and-paginate read operation: defaults, override, pagination, and access requirements. There is no output schema, so 'Returns paginated results' is thin on return-shape details, but nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 baseline 3 applies. The description's 'pass status="archived" to surface them' echoes the schema's status description ('archived excluded unless requested') without adding new parameter-level meaning.

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 (List) and resource (Circles) with optional filters, making its function immediately clear. It is easily distinguished from circle siblings like create_circle, get_circle, update_circle, and list_circle_members, none of which list circles themselves.

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?

Provides a concrete access precondition (Proof account, set PROOF_API_KEY, restart server) and explicitly warns that start_login does NOT open this tool, which prevents a likely misstep. However, it does not contrast against alternatives such as get_circle for a single circle or list_circle_members for membership, so selection among circle-related list tools is left to inference.

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