List Checklist Signature Requests

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

Annotations already indicate it's read-only and idempotent. The description adds that it returns a paginated JSON array, mentions pagination control (page, per_page), and includes the API endpoint. This goes beyond annotations, though the mention of 'Inspections' instead of 'Signature Requests' slightly detracts from clarity.

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 (6 sentences) with each sentence serving a distinct purpose: purpose, use case, return type, pagination, required params, API endpoint. No wasted words.

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, the description covers purpose, usage, pagination, required params, and API details. The inconsistency with 'Inspections' is a minor gap, but overall it's sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly. No output schema is present, which would add more context but is not required for a list operation.

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% coverage, adequately describing all parameters (e.g., 'Page number for paginated results'). The description reiterates required params and explains pagination control ('Use page and per_page to control pagination'), adding some contextual value but not significantly 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 the tool lists signature requests for a specified checklist (verb+resource). It also provides usage context (enumerate inspections, paginated overview, find IDs, filter). However, it inconsistently refers to 'Inspections' instead of 'Signature Requests', which may cause minor confusion.

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 explicitly says when to use the tool ('enumerate Inspections...paginated overview, find IDs, filter by query parameters') and mentions required parameters. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives, but the use case is clear enough among sibling tools like show/create/delete signature request.

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