List Drawing Sets

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by stating the response is a paginated JSON array, explaining pagination controls (page, per_page), and noting the exact API endpoint. It does not disclose any additional behavioral aspects beyond what annotations and schema imply.

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: two sentences covering purpose and usage. It is front-loaded with the core action and immediately provides context for when to use it. Every sentence adds value and there is no unnecessary information.

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?

The description mentions pagination metadata and the API endpoint, but lacks completeness in accurately describing the return type (says 'array of Drawings' instead of drawing sets). It also does not detail the filter parameters beyond a general reference, though the schema covers them. Given the minor inaccuracy, the description has a clear gap in precision.

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, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by summarizing key parameters: required project_id, page and per_page for pagination control, and hints at filter parameters. This helps the agent understand which parameters are essential without reading 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 it lists drawing sets in a project, which is the intended purpose. However, the second sentence says 'enumerate Drawings' which could cause confusion as the tool returns drawing sets, not individual drawings. This minor inconsistency slightly detracts from clarity.

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 tells when to use the tool: for a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters. It provides clear context but does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools, which would be helpful given the large number of sibling tools.

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