apidog_list_endpoints

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses what the tool returns (method, path, summary, tags, folder, status, maintainer) and that it is filterable, which is meaningful. It does not mention pagination, sorting, or read-only status, but 'List' strongly implies a non-mutating operation.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by return fields and filter options. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 listing tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides enough context: what it lists, what it returns, and how to filter. It omits potential pagination or limit behavior, but the core calling scenario is adequately covered.

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 schema already fully documents all four filter parameters. The description's filter list mostly restates the schema and adds no new 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 states a clear action and resource: 'List all API endpoints,' and enumerates the returned fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling apidog_search_endpoints, which likely overlaps in functionality.

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 clearly signals this is the tool for retrieving a broad list of endpoints, optionally narrowed by filters. It does not explicitly state when to use apidog_search_endpoints or apidog_get_endpoint instead, but the listing intent is clear enough for basic selection.

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