list_ux_pages

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

The annotations (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true) already cover the safety profile. The description adds the scoping nuance that pages are listed within a specific app, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, return format, or permission requirements. Given the strong annotations, this is acceptable but not enriching.

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, clear sentence with the action verb front-loaded. It contains no fluff and earns its place.

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 simple list operation with 100% schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description is mostly sufficient. However, the presence of the near-identical sibling 'list_uib_pages' creates ambiguity that the description does not resolve, and there is no output schema to clarify return structure.

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 parameters (app_sys_id, limit, query) are fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no additional explanation, but this is acceptable since the schema carries the parameter 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 clearly states the action (list), resource (pages), and context (Next Experience UI Builder application). It is specific enough to understand the tool's function, but it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_uib_pages', which appears to serve a similar purpose.

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 like list_uib_pages, and no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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