List Satisfaction Surveys

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description has a lower burden. It adds the behavioral detail of cursor-based pagination, which is useful, but does not disclose response shape, default limits, error behavior, or any additional constraints. Thus, it makes a moderate contribution beyond annotations.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the HTTP method and endpoint, followed by a concise summary of the action and pagination. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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, read-only list tool with optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the action, scope, and pagination mechanism. It lacks an explicit description of the response structure, but given the low complexity and strong annotations, this is a minor 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 input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters (limit, cursor, order_by). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'satisfaction surveys' and explicitly states scope ('all'), clearly distinguishing it from singular get or mutating create/update siblings. It also mentions cursor-based pagination, adding a specific and useful behavioral detail.

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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gorgias_get_satisfaction_survey for a single survey or gorgias_create_satisfaction_survey for creation. No context or exclusions are given; the usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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