kb_list_documents

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that bodies and embeddings are not included, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention other aspects like pagination, ordering, or whether filtering is exact or partial. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose and scope. Every word contributes value, and there is no redundancy or filler. It is perfectly concise.

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 5 parameters (0 required) and a tool with multiple filter options, the description is too brief. It does not explain how filters combine, the meaning of each field, or what the output schema contains. An agent cannot fully judge whether this tool meets a specific filtering need without additional inference.

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 provides no information about the 5 parameters (limit, domain, status, service, document_type). The description must compensate due to low coverage but does not, leaving the agent to rely solely on parameter names and types, which may be insufficient.

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 it lists filtered document metadata and explicitly excludes bodies and embeddings. This distinguishes it from siblings like kb_search (full text) and kb_get_document (full document). The verb 'list' combined with the resource 'document metadata' is specific.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kb_search or kb_get_document. The description implies use for metadata, but does not mention exclusions or specific scenarios. An agent would have to infer usage from the purpose.

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