blogger_blogs_listByUser

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 discloses that the operation returns a list/array, but it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation, mention authentication requirements, or describe any side effects. It provides some useful context (return format) but lacks details about pagination, filtering defaults, or user-specific behavior.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that state the core function and the return type. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource.

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 the tool has 5 optional parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is somewhat minimal. It clearly identifies the operation (list blogs by user) and return type, but it does not provide usage guidance, mention filtering capabilities, or clarify behavioral aspects like read-only nature. The schema covers parameters, but for a tool with this complexity, a bit more context (e.g., 'By default, userId is set to self') would improve completeness.

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 the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides. It references 'a specific user' which maps to the userId parameter, but does not explain the default ('self') or the filtering options (role, status, view, fetchUserInfo). The schema fully describes these, so the description does not need to compensate.

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's function: 'List all blogs associated with a specific user.' The verb 'list' and resource 'blogs' are specific, and it distinguishes this tool from siblings like blogger_blogs_get (get a single blog) and blogger_blogs_getByUrl (get by URL). It also mentions the return type ('array of blogs'), reinforcing its purpose.

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 only explains what the tool does, not when to use it over alternatives. There is no explicit mention of exclusions or alternative tools. The intended usage is implied by the name and description, but the tool does not provide direct guidance such as 'use this to list all blogs for a user, versus blogger_blogs_get for a single blog.'

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