list_agendas

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It indicates a read-only list operation and explains the importance of the list_key in the output. It does not detail pagination or exact output structure, but for a zero-parameter list tool, this is sufficient and adds value beyond a minimal description.

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 two sentences. It front-loads the core action ('Lista todas las agendas') and immediately adds valuable context about the list_key. Every word serves a purpose, with no repetition or filler.

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 (no parameters, no output schema, many siblings), the description covers the essential: listing all agendas and the critical role of the list_key. It could mention output fields or pagination, but it provides enough context for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it correctly refers to the schema's coverage (trivially 100%). No additional parameter information is necessary.

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 uses the verb 'Lista' (Lists) and specifies the resource 'agendas (listas de contactos)', clearly stating what the tool does. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create/delete/find by focusing on listing all items, and adds context about the list_key for further operations.

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 on when to use this tool (to obtain the list_key needed for adding contacts or retrieving contacts). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools for specific needs like searching, so it slightly misses the full 'exclusions' criterion.

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