List Correspondence Type Users

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 ('Use page and per_page to control pagination; the response includes pagination metadata') and mentions required parameter, providing useful context beyond annotations.

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 somewhat verbose with redundant information (e.g., repeating 'Custom - Configurable Tools' and including an API path). It is front-loaded with the main purpose but could be more concise.

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 no output schema, the description adequately states 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Custom - Configurable Tools' and mentions pagination metadata. It includes the endpoint and a link for more info, covering essential context.

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% with all three parameters documented. The description reiterates 'Required parameters: project_id' and suggests using page/per_page for pagination, adding minimal 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 'Returns a list of all Correspondence Types Users Availability for the specified Project.' It also explains usage for paginated overview and filtering, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_correspondence_type_items.

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 explicit guidance: 'Use this to enumerate Custom - Configurable Tools when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It references a tutorial link but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives.

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