List Drawing Tiles

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

The description contains a factual inaccuracy: it says 'Returns a paginated JSON array of Drawings' but the tool is about drawing tiles. Annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) are consistent and non-contradictory, but the description misstates the return type, reducing transparency. It does add pagination metadata context, but the error undermines trust.

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 (5 sentences) and front-loaded with purpose and usage. However, it contains the inaccuracy about 'Drawings' and could be slightly more streamlined. Still, it is efficient and avoids 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?

Given no output schema, the description should clearly describe return values. It mentions 'maximum Zoom Level and Tile Size' but then contradicts itself by saying 'array of Drawings.' Pagination metadata is noted, but the inconsistency makes the description incomplete for understanding the exact response structure.

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 covers all 4 parameters with 100% description coverage, so the description adds little extra value beyond noting required parameters and pagination behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 explicitly states 'Lists the Drawing Tiles in the specified Drawing Revision along with the maximum Zoom Level and Tile Size' and provides specific use cases: 'to enumerate Drawings when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_drawings or list_drawing_revisions by focusing on tiles within a revision.

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 advises when to use the tool ('enumerate Drawings when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters') and specifies required parameters and pagination controls. However, it lacks explicit exclusionary guidance or alternative tool suggestions, which would improve the score.

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