list_documents

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly conveys that this is a listing operation and that filters can be applied, but doesn't mention matching semantics (exact match vs partial), whether the result is read-only, or what happens when no docs match. Since output schema covers return structure, these gaps are moderate, not critical.

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 sentence that front-loads the primary purpose and adds the key condition ('optionally filtered') without any redundancy. Every word contributes to understanding the tool.

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?

The tool is a simple list with two optional parameters and an output schema available, so the description is largely adequate. The missing guidance on when to choose search_knowledge_base over this tool leaves only a minor gap in full context.

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%, and both parameters already have clear inline descriptions in the schema. The description text independently mentions only generic optional filtering, so it does not improve on the structured schema data, keeping this at the baseline.

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 identifies the exact action ('List') and resource ('every article in the knowledge base'), setting it apart from siblings like search_knowledge_base, which implies a searching use case. The optional filtering is mentioned, so an agent can recognize this as the enumeration tool.

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 implies 'use this to list documents' but gives no explicit direction about when to prefer this over search_knowledge_base, or when not to use it. It relies on the agent inferring the distinction from the '*' keyword, which is plausible but not directly stated.

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