get_spam_listing_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Get' implies a read operation, but no details about pagination, scope of results, or side-effect-free confirmation are provided. This is extremely thin coverage for an unannotated 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 a single six-word sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the basic action, though it sacrifices informative detail for brevity.

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 tool with four parameters, zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and a large sibling list, this description is far too thin. The presence of an output schema helps with return shape but does not compensate for missing parameter semantics, usage context, or behavioral expectations.

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%, and the description adds no information about zoid, spam_category, limit, or start. The words 'organization' and 'spam' offer weak hints, but the required 'zoid' and 'spam_category' values and the pagination parameters are left undefined.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a resource 'organization spam listing information', making the core action clear and distinguishing it from siblings like get_organization_details and get_audit_records. However, 'spam listing information' is somewhat vague about whether it returns a list, a summary, or something else.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus its many siblings. There is no mention of alternatives, exclusions, or the typical scenario where this tool is the right choice, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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