list_relationships

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds that it lists relationships for a specific constituent, which aligns with annotations. No additional behavioral details like pagination or return format are 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?

The description is a single short sentence that conveys the core function without waste. However, it is extremely brief and could include more useful details without losing conciseness.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description should ideally mention the return format or behavior (e.g., returns an array of relationship objects). The description is minimally complete for a simple list operation, but it lacks details that would help an agent understand the output.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds meaning by specifying 'for a specific constituent', which implies the `constituent_id` parameter selects the constituent. This adds value beyond the schema alone, but it could be more explicit about the parameter's role.

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 'List constituent relationships for a specific constituent' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (constituent relationships), and it differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_relationship' (single item) and 'list_relationship_types' (types only).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, such as 'get_relationship' for a specific relationship or other list tools. The description only states the function without context.

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