List All Prime Contracts

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

Annotations already indicate the tool is read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world. The description adds that it returns a paginated JSON array with metadata, which is useful but does not significantly extend beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 4-5 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence provides relevant information, including a link to filtering docs. It is efficient without unnecessary details.

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 tool's simplicity as a list endpoint with good annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main aspects: what it returns, pagination, required parameter, and filtering reference. It is sufficiently complete for the agent.

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 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already explains each parameter. The description adds general context about pagination (page, per_page) and filtering, but this is minimal additional value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states that the tool returns all Prime Contracts for a specified project and lists use cases like enumerating for paginated overview, finding IDs, or filtering. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_prime_contracts', which may have similar functionality.

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 provides usage guidance by stating when to use the tool (e.g., for paginated overview, filtering). However, it does not explicitly exclude cases or mention alternatives, such as when to use a different list prime contracts tool.

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