List documentation pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and a closed world, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds the return-field list and the prefix-scoping notion, which is useful, but says nothing about result size, ordering, or what happens at the default limit of 200.

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 tight sentences, zero filler: the first delivers the returned fields, the second delivers the use cases. Front-loaded with the most decision-relevant 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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and annotations cover the safety profile for a simple two-param read tool. The only real gap is pagination/truncation behavior around the limit parameter, which stays unaddressed.

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 both limit and path_prefix are already documented in the schema. The description only gestures at the prefix behavior already captured by the path_prefix description, adding no syntax, matching rules, or limit/total-count semantics. Baseline 3 applies.

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 (list) and resource (documentation pages) and enumerates the returned fields (path, title, description, last-modified date), which tells the agent exactly what this returns. It implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by framing itself as a browsing tool used 'before searching', but never names get_doc and search_docs directly.

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?

Gives clear context: use it to browse structure before searching, or to find pages under a prefix. It references the searching alternative, so the agent knows when to prefer search_docs. It lacks explicit when-not conditions (e.g. don't use when you already know the exact page).

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