enoch_papers_list

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

Annotations already indicate a safe read operation (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination behavior, data freshness, or rate limits. It does not contradict annotations but provides minimal extra value.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word is necessary. No redundant 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?

The description is insufficient given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, no output schema). It does not describe return behavior, pagination, default sorting, or how filters interact. An agent would have gaps in understanding how to use the tool effectively.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description helps only by mentioning 'search/status filtering', which clarifies the purpose of the 'search' and 'status' parameters. However, it fails to explain 'page', 'page_size', and 'sort' parameters, leaving ambiguity for the agent.

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 papers with optional search/status filtering' clearly states the verb (List) and resource (papers), and distinguishes from sibling tools like enoch_paper_detail and enoch_reviews_list by focusing on listing with filters.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention alternatives or context for using this tool over other list tools like enoch_runs or enoch_events.

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