ariel_get_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Get' aligns with that safety profile. It adds that the response includes metadata and members, but does not disclose pagination behavior, authentication requirements, or error behavior. Given the annotation coverage, this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the operation and object with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a simple read-only list metadata tool.

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?

The description is minimally sufficient for a low-complexity read operation: it names the return contents (metadata and members) and the schema covers parameters. However, there is no output schema, so it could be more explicit about response shape and pagination, and it does not mention the closely related list-feed 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 schema fully documents list, limit, and cursor. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond naming the high-level purpose, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('Get') and resource ('a list's metadata and members'), which clearly differentiates it from the sibling ariel_get_list_feed (which returns a feed of posts). The description leaves no doubt about the object being retrieved.

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 use when an agent needs list metadata or membership, but it does not state when to choose this over ariel_get_list_feed or other related list tools. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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