List Recycled Action Plan Template Items

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true) already indicate a safe read. The description adds value by explaining pagination behavior, the return format (paginated JSON array with metadata), and specifying the endpoint and API area, which are not covered by 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: two sentences plus a line on required parameters and API info. It front-loads the primary purpose and use cases, with no redundant or extraneous 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (list operation with no output schema), the description covers pagination, required parameter, and return type. It also includes the API area and endpoint for reference. Filter parameters are fully documented in the schema, so no further detail is needed.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema: it mentions `page` and `per_page` for pagination and notes `company_id` as required. It does not elaborate on filter parameters, but the schema already describes them thoroughly.

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 returns Recycled Action Plan Template Items for a given company, with verbs 'returns' and 'enumerate'. It specifies use cases like paginated overview, finding IDs, and filtering. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_recycled_action_plan_items, though the resource is distinct.

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 clear context: use this for paginated enumeration, finding IDs, and filtering with query parameters. It mentions the required `company_id` parameter and pagination controls. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the 'recycled' prefix implies the scope.

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