list_task_lists

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden; 'List' indicates a read-only operation, which is the main behavioral trait. It adds a helpful clarification that these are folders, but it does not disclose any behavior around multiple providers, empty results, or errors. Still, for a simple listing tool this is minimally adequate.

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?

One short sentence with no filler; the parenthetical '(folders)' earns its place by clarifying terminology. The description is front-loaded and entirely relevant.

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, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description plus schema cover the essential calling context. A minor gap is that the return shape is not described, but 'list' makes the result type obvious.

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?

The single parameter provider is already fully documented in the input schema, including an example value and the conditional omit guidance. The description adds no new parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 for full schema coverage applies.

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 identifies a specific action ('List') and resource ('task lists (folders) of a provider'), which clearly separates it from task-level siblings like list_tasks and from create_task_list/delete_task_list. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, but the resource scope is unambiguous.

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 use case is implied by the phrasing (list task lists for a provider), and the input schema adds the key condition that the provider parameter should be omitted only when exactly one provider is connected. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or any exclusions.

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