List automations

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this as a safe read, so the safety burden is lifted. The description adds useful behavior by disclosing the pagination contract and the nextCursor handoff, which the annotations do not cover, but it says nothing about result ordering, page size defaults, or limits.

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 with zero filler; the resource and its paginated nature are front-loaded before the cursor mechanics. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple paginated list tool with a readOnly annotation and no output schema, the description covers the core action and the pagination loop. The only real gap is the undocumented limit parameter and lack of any hint about the returned automation shape.

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 explains cursor semantics well (source it from the previous response's nextCursor), but the limit parameter — including its 1–100 range — is left entirely undocumented.

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 a specific resource (comment→DM automations), plus the pagination nature. This distinguishes it from generic list siblings like list_tags or list_leads, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_automation or list_dm_logs.

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?

Provides clear operational guidance for pagination ('Pass cursor from the previous response's nextCursor to page'), which is genuine usage instruction. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over get_automation or list_dm_logs, and no stated prerequisites.

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