clio_list_documents

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

With no annotations provided, the description should disclose behavioral aspects like read-only nature, side effects, or authentication requirements. It only mentions JWT scope routing, which is generic. It does not state whether listing is safe or if it triggers any actions.

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?

The description is short but wastes space on routing details that are likely standard. The first sentence repeats the title. No effort is made to front-load the purpose or organize information for quick comprehension.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description still needs to explain the tool's role and when it is appropriate. It lacks context about Clio documents, the scope of results, and how it fits with other tools. The description is not complete enough for an agent to use it reliably.

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 only parameter 'arguments' is described as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation', which adds no meaning beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description fails to specify what keys or values the JSON should contain, leaving the agent uninformed.

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 states the operation name ('list_documents') and platform tool identifier, but does not explain what listing documents means in the context of Clio. It fails to differentiate from sibling tools like clio_get_document or clio_list_folders, leaving the agent to infer purpose from the name alone.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions relative to other listing or document-related tools.

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