List Project Insurances

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds valuable context about pagination, the return format (JSON array with metadata), and the API endpoint. No contradictions with 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 concise at 4 sentences, starting with the main purpose. The inclusion of API metadata is mildly extraneous but not excessive. Could be slightly trimmed without loss of clarity.

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 explains the return type (paginated JSON array of Directory records) and mentions pagination metadata. It provides enough context for an AI agent to understand the tool's function and basic usage, though it does not detail record fields.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about pagination control (page, per_page) and mentions the required project_id, but does not significantly extend understanding beyond the schema. The view parameter is implicitly covered by 'filter by query parameters'.

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 returns a list of insurances for a project, mentioning pagination, ID lookup, and filtering. It differentiates from sibling tools by specifying 'associated with the specified Project', though it could explicitly contrast with company-level insurance lists like 'list_company_insurances'.

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?

Provides guidance on when to use (paginated overview, find IDs, filter) and mentions the required parameter. However, it does not state when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools for related tasks, such as 'sync_project_insurances' for bulk operations.

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