bsky_get_lists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states it retrieves lists but doesn't describe pagination behavior (implied by 'cursor' and 'limit' parameters), authentication needs, rate limits, or what happens if the user doesn't exist. For a read operation with multiple parameters, this leaves significant gaps.

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 in Japanese that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the tool has an output schema (which handles return values), 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It covers the core purpose but lacks parameter explanations and behavioral context, leaving the agent to infer details from the schema alone.

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 for undocumented parameters. It only mentions '指定ユーザー' (specified user), which maps to the 'handle' parameter, but doesn't explain 'limit', 'cursor', or 'acting_handle'. With 4 parameters total, this leaves 75% undocumented, failing to add meaningful semantics beyond the schema.

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 the action ('取得します' - get/retrieve) and resource ('指定ユーザーのリスト一覧' - specified user's list collection), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'bsky_get_list' (singular) or 'bsky_get_followers', but the focus on lists is clear.

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. It doesn't mention sibling tools like 'bsky_get_list' (for a specific list) or 'bsky_get_followers' (for a different resource type), nor does it specify prerequisites or contextual constraints beyond the required 'handle' parameter.

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