List the content of a DataLens collection

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld. The description adds behavior beyond them: results are auto-paginated, and output is capped at the configured item cap unless `limit` is passed. That cap/pagination disclosure is genuinely useful context the agent can't get from the annotations alone.

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, front-loaded with the resource meaning and then the navigation hint. Zero filler; the cap caveat is stated precisely.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, navigation, and pagination/cap behavior. Return structure is only loosely sketched (no output schema exists), but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all 8 parameters including `mode`, `limit`, and `collection_id`. The description only reinforces the `limit`/cap interaction already documented in the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource: it lists what a collection holds (collections, workbooks, entries). This clearly distinguishes it from the flat datalens_workbooks_list and datalens_entries_list siblings, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 context and a workflow: 'Start here to find a workbook: list the root, then descend.' That tells the agent when to reach for this tool versus a direct by-ids or workbooks-list call. It stops short of explicit exclusions or naming the competing siblings.

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