Swagger: List Table Of Contents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, making the read nature clear. The description adds that the tool returns paginated results (via page and size parameters), which is a behavioral detail not captured by annotations. However, it does not discuss what happens if sectionId is invalid or the structure of the returned content.

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 and well-structured, with a clear opening line and a bulleted parameter list. The 'Toolset: Table Of Contents' line is slightly redundant but not wasteful. It could be trimmed to just the purpose line and parameters, but overall efficient.

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 presence of an output schema and annotations, the description adequately sets context: it specifies the target resource (table of contents for a section), mentions pagination, and lists required parameters. It could briefly explain the hierarchical nature of the table of contents, but overall it is complete enough for a read-only 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all parameters. The description reproduces these descriptions almost verbatim, adding minimal new meaning (e.g., clarifying sectionId as 'unique identifier for the section within the product'). Baseline is 3, and no additional insight beyond the schema is provided.

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's purpose: 'Get table of contents for a section of a product within a portal.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings like swagger_create_table_of_contents and swagger_delete_table_of_contents. However, it could be more explicit about how it differs from other listing tools (e.g., swagger_list_portal_product_sections).

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 the tool is for retrieving a table of contents when you have a sectionId, but it does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., swagger_list_portal_product_sections) or when not to use it. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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