list_labels

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'List all labels' and adds no information about ordering, pagination, scope (e.g., global vs project), or read-only status beyond the implied 'list.' This is minimal disclosure for a zero-annotation tool.

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 words, perfectly efficient for a parameterless list operation. No redundant or extra sentences.

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 is a simple zero-parameter list operation with an output schema present. The description covers the core action, but omits potential nuances like whether this lists labels across all projects or in a specific context (though parameters could not disambiguate). Overall, it is nearly complete for a simple list tool.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the input schema is fully covered by definition. The description need not add parameter context; the baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('labels'), and explicitly says 'all labels,' making the operation unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the label resource, which no other sibling lists.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While there is no other list-labels sibling, it doesn't mention related operations like create_label or add_label, nor any context such as retrieve labels to filter tasks.

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