list_guilds

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what is already in the annotations, so it neither enhances nor contradicts the declared 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—a single sentence with no filler. It conveys the core purpose and the key pagination hint efficiently, earning full marks for economy of expression.

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 simple nature of a list operation and the presence of pagination parameters, the description provides minimal context. It lacks any indication of response shape, ordering, or the effect of 'before' versus 'after,' so an agent may need to infer behavior from the schema or other sources.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it only minimally explains the 'after' parameter for pagination. The 'limit' and 'before' parameters remain unexplained, leaving significant ambiguity for an agent invoking the tool.

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 action ('List') and resource ('accessible servers' = guilds), distinguishing it from singular fetch tools like get_guild or other list tools like list_channels. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative, but the verb + resource makes the purpose 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?

The description provides an implicit usage hint ('pass the last ID as after to paginate') but does not explain the 'before' or 'limit' parameters, nor does it contrast with alternative tools for retrieving guilds. The guidance is partial and leaves gaps.

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