get_documents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that results are paginated and enumerates returned fields, but says nothing about ordering, permissions/auth requirements, behavior when page exceeds the result set, or rate limits.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope. The second sentence listing return fields is largely redundant with the existing output schema, which is minor waste rather than bloat.

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?

An output schema exists, so the return-field sentence is unnecessary, and the real gaps remain: no differentiation from get_webi_docs, no auth/prerequisite context, and no pagination semantics. Adequate but with clear omissions.

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 0% — the two parameters (page, pagesize) have defaults but no descriptions. The word 'paginated' is the only hint that page/pagesize control slicing; the 1-based indexing and default page size of 50 are never explained in prose, so the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Retrieves a paginated list of Web Intelligence documents from the repository.' An agent knows what it does, but the definition does not distinguish it from the sibling get_webi_docs, which appears to target the same resource, so sibling differentiation is missing.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., authenticated session required despite login/logout siblings), and no routing to alternatives such as get_webi_docs or get_doc_details.

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