reference_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention whether this is a read-only query, what data it returns, whether it has side effects, or any permissions or error behaviors. The word 'query' implies a read operation, but this is not explicitly stated, and the description does not explain the response structure or any edge cases.

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 run-on sentence that dumps a long list of variable names followed by a truncated JSON example. It lacks any structure, front-loading, or summarization. The example is cut off mid-string, making it even less useful. This is far from concise or well-organized.

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?

With 31 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is drastically incomplete. It does not explain what a reference list is, what the query returns, how to construct the various filters, or what the required 'id' parameter refers to. The tool is a complex GraphQL query, and the description provides almost no context for an agent to use it correctly.

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 schema descriptions are generic GraphQL type references (e.g., 'String', 'Int'), not semantic explanations. The tool description lists parameter names and gives an example filter object, which provides some shape but no meaning for most fields. It does not explain what 'after' and 'first' do, how the multiple filter/order groups (filter1..6, order1..6) relate to each other, or the purpose of 'columnSelector' and 'customer_slug'.

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 opens with 'Reference Lists · query referenceList' but never states what the tool actually does, such as retrieving a reference list by ID. The name 'reference_list' hints at a singular resource, but the description is essentially a label and a list of variables without a clear verb or resource. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like reference_lists or the various reference list 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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool, what scenarios it fits, or how it differs from alternatives. The description merely lists parameters and provides an example. Sibling tools like 'reference_lists' (likely plural query) and 'create_reference_list' exist, but no comparison or selection criteria are provided.

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