kaiten_list_documents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'List' indicates a read-only operation, and the response-field listing helps set expectations. However, it does not mention permissions, whether archived or public documents are excluded by default, or any side-effect-free guarantees explicitly.

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 sentence with no filler. It states the action and resource immediately, then provides a compact, useful list of response fields.

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 tool has only three optional parameters and no output schema, so the basics are adequately covered. The main gaps are lack of routing guidance and missing behavioral details like default ordering or whether archived documents are returned, but these are minor for a simple list operation.

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 no additional meaning for limit, query, or offset beyond what the schema already documents.

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 Kaiten documents.' It also clarifies the tool's output by enumerating response fields. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from kaiten_get_document or other document-related list tools beyond the verb.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kaiten_get_document or kaiten_list_document_groups. The only usage signal is the word 'List', which implies collection retrieval but provides no exclusions or context about when to prefer this tool.

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