list_redirects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the return shape (from_permalink -> to_permalink pairs), which is more than most list tools offer, but says nothing about read-only safety, pagination, result limits, or auth requirements.

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?

A single sentence with no waste, front-loading the verb and resource and using the parenthetical to convey the output shape in three words.

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 parameterless, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns and at what scope. It falls short only on pagination/volume expectations, which an agent might need for a potentially long list.

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 schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies the tool is unscoped beyond the site, consistent with an empty input 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 (List) and resource (path redirects) and clarifies the data shape with the from_permalink -> to_permalink notation. It implicitly separates itself from the create_redirect/delete_redirect siblings by verb, but never names them or explicitly frames this as the read-only counterpart.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling tools that mutate the same resource (create_redirect, delete_redirect). 'for the site' hints at scope but gives no conditions or exclusions for an agent to reason about.

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