get_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states it retrieves a list but doesn't disclose what the returned structure contains, edge cases (e.g., behavior for non-existent IDs), or any filtering/scoping constraints. This is a significant gap given zero annotation coverage.

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?

A single concise sentence that is completely front-loaded with the essential information. No filler, no redundancy, no waste. Every word 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?

For a simple single-parameter retrieval tool, the description is mostly adequate. The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description could note what the returned list/segment object looks like. Given the tool's simplicity and full schema coverage, the gaps are minor but the lack of any return-value context keeps it from scoring higher.

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 schema already documents the single 'id' parameter fully. The description adds the semantic nuance that 'id' refers to a list/segment identifier, complementing rather than repeating the schema. With only one parameter and full coverage, 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?

The description states a clear verb+resource ('Retrieve a specific list/segment by ID'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_lists (plural, which retrieves all lists) and create_list/update_list/delete_list. Could be slightly more explicit about the list/segment relationship but purpose is clear.

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 indicates it retrieves a specific single entity, implying it's used for single-item retrieval by ID, contrasting with get_lists for all lists. However, there's no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives. The 'list/segment' phrasing hints at dual identity but doesn't clarify when to use each.

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