list_tools

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions what types of tools are returned but does not state whether it's read-only, pagination behavior beyond parameter defaults, or any other side effects. The defaults stated in the description (page=1, per_page=100) conflict with the schema defaults (null), creating inconsistency.

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, using only two paragraphs (one for purpose, one for parameters). It front-loads the action and return type. Every sentence is necessary.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two optional params, no required params, output schema present), the description covers the basics: what is returned and parameter defaults. It lacks details like ordering, total count, or error behavior, but is fairly complete for a straightforward list operation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by providing parameter defaults (page: 1, per_page: 100) and naming the parameters in context. However, no explanation of these parameters' effect beyond basic numerics, and the defaults conflict with schema null defaults.

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 clearly states 'List all tools in your organization' and specifies the types of tools returned (webhook, knowledge, client). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_tool (single tool) and other list_* tools that list different resources.

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 implies usage for listing tools but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_tools or get_tool. No 'when not to use' or alternative mention.

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