List DataLens licences

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond them by disclosing 'auto-paginated' behavior (a real trait, since the schema exposes no cursor/offset) and by summarizing the shape of each returned record, which matters given there is no output schema.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the core identity ('licences (seats) of the DataLens instance') and the pagination behavior front-loaded. The second sentence is a compact field enumeration rather than padding.

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?

A read-only list tool with full schema coverage and clear annotations; the description covers the one thing the schema does not, namely that results are auto-paginated and what each record contains (compensating for the absent output schema). Only the filter parameters' effect on results is left unaddressed.

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 limit, order, status, sort_by and user_ids are already documented in the schema; baseline 3 applies. The description mentions nothing about filtering by status or user, or about sort order, so it adds no meaning beyond the structured fields.

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 ('The licences (seats) of the DataLens instance') and enumerates the entity's fields (holder, type creator/viewer, active status, last sign-in), so the agent knows exactly what is being listed. It is clearly distinct from siblings like datalens_licensing_limit_get or datalens_licensing_licenses_assign, though it never names those alternatives to sharpen the distinction.

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 when-to-use guidance is given: nothing says when to prefer this over datalens_licensing_limit_get (the cap) or datalens_licensing_licenses_assign (seat assignment). The name implies 'list', but the description adds no context, exclusions, or prerequisites.

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