supportpages_list_walkthroughs

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds real behavioral context beyond structured data: it discloses what state is returned (generation/readiness/sharing/article-publication) and, importantly, the non-obvious pagination mechanic ('pass both next_cursor as after_id and through_id').

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with what it lists, followed by return content, filtering, pagination, and scope exclusion in a sensible order. Minor cost: the pagination sentence is slightly cryptic without parameter names appearing in the schema descriptions.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is largely redundant but harmless. For a filtered-list tool with pagination, the description covers scope, filtering, and paging adequately. The unexplained 'workspace' parameter and unnamed siblings leave small gaps.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load. It documents article_id (filter to one article) and explains how after_id/through_id are used for pagination, but leaves the 'workspace' parameter completely unaddressed. Partial compensation for a 0%-coverage schema.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (hosted video walkthroughs) with scope detail ('including videos created in the browser'). The closing 'Does not generate or share videos' routes the agent away from supportpages_create_video_walkthrough, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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?

Gives clear context — use to enumerate walkthroughs, optionally scoped by article_id — and provides an exclusion ('Does not generate or share videos'). It stops short of naming the alternative tools (create_video_walkthrough, get_walkthrough) or stating when to prefer a single-get instead of a list.

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