List Body Parts

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds pagination details (page, per_page, metadata) and required parameter, which is helpful. However, it incorrectly states the return type as Incidents, which undermines transparency.

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 relatively concise at 4 sentences, but it contains contradictory information that wastes the agent's attention. A cleaner, error-free version would score higher.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and annotations present, the description should explain the response structure (fields of a body part object) and clarify the endpoint purpose. The description mentions pagination metadata but is incomplete about the data shape and the full use case.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions page, per_page, and company_id but does not add meaning for other parameters (filters, sort) beyond their schema descriptions. Minimal added value.

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 starts with 'Return a list of all supported Body Parts' which is clear, but then says 'Use this to enumerate Incidents' and 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Incidents,' which is contradictory and misleading. The purpose is muddled by confusing body parts with incidents.

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 minimal guidance: it says to use for paginated overview, finding IDs, or filtering, but does not explain when not to use this tool or alternatives. The sibling list contains many tools, but no comparison is given.

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