kaiten_list_children

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose meaningful behavior: it returns only direct children, supports root-level listing when the parameter is omitted, and fetches spaces, documents, and document groups in parallel. However, it does not mention pagination, result ordering, authentication requirements, or potential for large result sets, which are relevant for a list operation without 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 three short sentences with no fluff. The primary purpose is front-loaded, the conditional behavior follows immediately, and the parallel-fetch detail is a useful addition without unnecessary length.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains the input semantics, the scope of results, and the entity types returned. The only notable omission is return-value shape and pagination behavior, but the description is sufficient for correct invocation in most use cases.

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 schema already documents the parameter. The description adds value by clarifying that omitting produces root-level entities and that supplying it returns only direct children of that entity. This goes beyond the schema's brief 'Parent entity UID' text and helps an agent understand the exact semantics.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List direct children of an entity in the Kaiten sidebar tree.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like kaiten_list_card_children by scoping to the sidebar tree and explicitly naming the returned entity types: spaces, documents, and document groups. The root-level vs. parent-child behavior is also made explicit.

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 gives clear conditional usage context: 'Without parent_entity_uid: returns root-level entities. With parent_entity_uid: returns direct children of that entity.' It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide to call it for sidebar tree child listings.

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