List LinkedIn pages

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scoping detail that only pages connected to a profile are returned, but it does not disclose auth needs, pagination, or rate limits; that is acceptable given the 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 a single front-loaded phrase with no filler, and every word contributes meaning. The title supplies the verb, making the combined definition economical and easy to scan.

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?

For a read-only, one-parameter list tool with an output schema and annotations, the description is largely complete: it gives the resource, scope, and profile relationship. Missing details such as the exact profile identifier format and alternative routing are minor for basic invocation.

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 0%, so the description must carry weight; 'connected to a profile' clarifies that the profile parameter identifies whose pages are listed. It does not specify the expected format of the profile value, though the schema's required array already signals that the parameter is optional.

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 title's verb 'List' combines with the description's resource 'LinkedIn company pages' and scope 'connected to a profile' to state exactly what the tool does. The focus on LinkedIn clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_facebook_pages and get_google_business_locations.

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 implies the use case—retrieving LinkedIn pages for a given profile—but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives. The agent must infer usage from the resource name and scope.

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