List annotations

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which the description aligns with. However, the description adds no additional behavioral details such as pagination behavior, default sorting, or rate limits. With annotations already present, the bar is lower, but no extra value is provided.

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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose and filters, second gives a practical usage hint. No wasted words, efficiently structured.

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 covers purpose and some parameters, but misses pagination behavior (limit/offset), response structure (no output schema), and default sorting. For a listing tool with 6 parameters and no output schema, these gaps reduce completeness.

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 33% (only project_id and limit have descriptions). The description mentions three filters (status, type, priority) but does not explain their meaning beyond enum values. It adds partial context but does not cover all parameters (offset, limit).

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 action 'List' the resource 'a project's annotations' and mentions optional filters (status, type, priority). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_annotation' and 'list_annotation_issues' by specifying it lists annotations themselves, not single annotations or issues.

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 a usage hint 'Start here with status "open"' but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools like 'list_annotation_issues' for listing issues. The guidance is helpful but not comprehensive.

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