list_stickers

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

No annotations provided, but description explicitly states 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait. It also describes the return fields (packageId, title, version). However, it omits details like auth requirements or pagination, which are less critical for a simple list operation.

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 concise with three front-loaded sentences: purpose, return fields, and usage guidance. No unnecessary words or repetitions.

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 no output schema, the description partially compensates by listing return fields. It covers the core functionality and usage context, though it could explicitly state the result format (e.g., array of objects).

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 coverage is 100%, with the language parameter already described well in the schema. The description does not add additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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?

Description clearly states 'List the sticker packages this LINE account OWNS' with a specific verb (list) and resource (sticker packages), and distinguishes from siblings by noting it only lists owned packages that can be sent.

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?

Explicitly directs to use search_stickers for individual sticker ids and then send_sticker for sending, providing clear workflow guidance and distinguishing when to use this tool vs. alternatives.

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