list_publications

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the transparency burden. It communicates output shape for detail='short' and 'full' and the domain concept, but breaks down for the 'medium' variant and doesn't discuss pagination, ordering, or brandId effects.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, no filler. The parenthetical and alternative tool reference are compact and useful.

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 two-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description plus schema are mostly sufficient. A minor gap is no mention of pagination or behavior for the 'medium' detail level, but it's acceptable.

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?

Although the schema covers 100% of parameters, the description's detail explanation is incomplete and slightly inconsistent with the schema: it says short returns id+name, while the schema says id + primary label + status. This adds misleading rather than clarifying value 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?

Starts with a clear verb ('List') and resource ('blog publications'), and explains what these are in parentheses. The final sentence explicitly differentiates it from list_publishing_connections, removing ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly says it is distinct from list_publishing_connections and why, telling the agent when not to use it. However, it doesn't mention other sibling list tools (e.g., list_blogs), so the guidance isn't exhaustive.

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