conf_get_spaces

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds one real behavioral fact beyond that: results are paginated to a single page. It stops short of explaining how to detect more pages or what the response contains.

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?

It is short and front-loaded with the verb and resource, so nothing is wasted. But the brevity crosses into under-specification: the four-word parenthetical is doing work it cannot support, and no sentence earns its place by explaining pagination.

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 paginated list tool with zero schema descriptions and no output schema, the description should explain the paging model and what a space record looks like. Neither is present, so an agent knows it lists spaces but not how to page through them or interpret the result.

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 both parameters (limit with default 25 and max 100, start with default 0) are undocumented anywhere. The description's "(one page)" gesture toward pagination does not explain that limit controls page size or that start is an offset, leaving the agent to infer the paging contract from bare integer types.

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?

"List spaces" names a specific verb and resource, so the basic operation is identifiable. However, the parenthetical "(one page)" is cryptic, and the description never distinguishes this from the singular sibling conf_get_space or from conf_search, leaving the agent to infer which listing tool to pick.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer conf_get_space or conf_search, and no prerequisites. The only usage hint is the ambiguous "(one page)", which implies a paging loop without saying how to continue it.

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