list_partner_kits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, and the description reinforces this with 'read-only or local operation.' It adds a meaningful auth requirement (platform-scoped API key) that is not in the annotations, though 'local operation' is somewhat ambiguous.

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 compact, consisting of two sentences that get straight to the point. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds necessary context without any fluff.

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 no-parameter list tool, the description covers the essential aspects: endpoint, content categories, auth, and safety. The phrase 'local operation' is unclear, but overall the description is sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the tool.

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 no parameters, so the description has nothing to add beyond the schema. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not mislead or omit anything relevant.

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 tool lists packaged SignalEDI API kits, naming specific categories and the endpoint. The verb 'list' distinguishes it from the sibling get_partner_kit, which implies fetching a single item.

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 when to use the tool (when listing kits) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The API key requirement is a constraint, not a usage guide relative to siblings.

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