List Endpoints for a Platform

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations, specifically the auth requirement ('No API key required') and the nature of the response (endpoint details, credit costs, response types). This helps the agent understand what to expect without duplication.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('List all available endpoints') and packs all key details efficiently. No wasted 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, clear schema, annotations) and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool returns (endpoints with parameters, costs, response types). It is complete enough for an agent to use correctly without additional documentation.

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 already provides full coverage for the single parameter 'platform' with a description and enum. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 available endpoints for a specific platform' with specific content details (required parameters, credit costs, response types). This distinguishes it from siblings like socialcrawl_list_platforms (lists platforms) and socialcrawl_request (makes requests).

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 clear context about when to use the tool: it is for discovering endpoints for a specific platform, and it notes that no API key is required. It does not explicitly compare to alternatives, but the sibling names and description make the intended use obvious.

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