List Saved Sites

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive annotations, the description discloses keyless-call behavior (returns auth_required rather than an empty list), requires a key, and details what the response contains including live deltas and portfolio flags. This gives the agent accurate expectations for side effects and failure modes.

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 longer than average, but every section earns its place: auth prerequisite, use cases, example queries, parameter explanation, return payload, and exclusions. It is front-loaded with the critical key requirement and organized clearly, though slightly dense.

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's auth requirement, per-account behavior, rich return data, and related siblings, the description covers all necessary context. The output schema exists, and the description still usefully summarizes the return contents and the key precondition, leaving no critical operational gap.

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?

The schema description already covers the since parameter fully, including accepted values, default, and how to use the cached generated_at timestamp. The tool description restates the same information without meaningfully adding beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the verb and resource: list saved DC Hub sites in-chat as a read-back. It also distinguishes itself from save_site and export_dataset, and provides concrete example user queries, so an agent can identify when this tool applies.

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?

It explicitly says when to use it — when a user wants to see/review saved sites or know what moved — and when not to use it, naming save_site for adding and export_dataset for downloading. It also gives a critical prerequisite: claim_free_key must be called first if no key exists.

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