List documents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It specifies the data scope ('current user's saved') and explicitly lists the output fields, making the operation's behavior transparent. However, it does not mention potential pagination, ordering, or rate limits, though these may be negligible for a simple list tool.

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, focused sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It includes essential details (return fields) without any filler or redundant information, earning its place fully.

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), the description is complete. It states the resource scope and the exact return fields, providing all necessary information for an agent to decide and invoke the tool correctly. No significant gaps exist.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty and schema description coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter details because there are none; per the rubric, a zero-parameter tool receives a baseline score of 4.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('the current user's saved mdgen documents'), and the returned fields (id, title, mode, updatedAt). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like read_document (which presumably fetches a single document's full content) and mutation tools.

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: it is for listing the current user's saved documents and shows metadata fields only. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the scope and returned fields imply when to use it compared to read_document or the mutation tools.

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