Data: list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description usefully adds pagination behavior (one page, 20 by default) and the filter syntax, though it does not explain how 'all' streaming interacts with 'limit' beyond what the schema states.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and pagination, then filter syntax, then the sibling routing. Zero waste.

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 read-only list tool, the description covers scope, return format ('Returns JSON'), pagination default, filter syntax, and alternative tools. With annotations carrying the safety profile and no output schema to explain, nothing an agent needs is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description's filter examples largely duplicate the schema's filter description, and the '20 by default' note repeats the limit parameter description, so it adds little semantic value beyond the structured fields.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List records in an entity') and explicitly differentiates itself from two siblings, data_get and search_query, with the conditions that select each. An agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

Names both alternatives and the exact condition for each: use data_get when the record id is known, use search_query for text search across entities. This leaves nothing to inference.

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