List Checklist List Inspection Type Filter Options

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that it returns a JSON array of filter values and mentions pagination, which is consistent. However, it does not elaborate on pagination behavior beyond what the schema implies with page/per_page parameters.

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 concise and well-structured: 4 sentences that front-load the purpose, state usage, return type, required parameter, and API endpoint. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a filter options listing tool with fully described parameters and comprehensive annotations (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld), the description covers all necessary information: what it does, when to use, what it returns, and the required parameter. No critical gaps are present.

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% description coverage, with all three parameters (project_id, page, per_page) documented. The description only restates that project_id is required, adding no new semantic meaning. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool's purpose: listing checklist list inspection type filter options. It uses specific verbs ('List', 'enumerate') and indicates it returns a JSON array of available filter values. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling filter tools like 'list_checklist_list_type_filter_options' despite having a distinct endpoint.

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 guidance on when to use the tool ('to enumerate Inspections when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters'), but it does not specify when not to use it or mention alternative tools. Given the many sibling filter options, this is a minimal but acceptable guideline.

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