list_questions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly signals a read-oriented discovery operation, but says nothing about pagination behavior, default filtering (activeOnly defaults true), permission requirements, or the shape of results. Adequate but with clear disclosure gaps.

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 sentences with zero filler; the operation is front-loaded ahead of the usage hint. Every clause earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, but for a paginated list tool with fully documented parameters the description covers the essential who/what/why. The main omission is any mention of pagination or result-size behavior, which leaves a small gap.

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%, with every parameter documented including the source enum and filters, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description's 'by source' only restates the required parameter and adds no format or semantics beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 correct.

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 a specific verb and resource ('List profile questions') and adds the scoping dimension ('by source'), which maps directly to the required source enum. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like get_my_answers, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

'Use this to discover available questions before submitting answers' gives a concrete workflow context that positions it ahead of submit_answer. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when not to use it (e.g. versus get_my_answers), so it is clear context without exclusions.

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