coda_list_rows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'List rows', implying read-only, but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens with large result sets. The description is too sparse.

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 very concise at one sentence, but it is too terse. It lacks structure or front-loading of key information. While brevity is positive, it omits necessary details that could be provided in a slightly longer but still concise format.

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 complexity of 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is highly incomplete. An AI agent would lack crucial information on pagination (pageToken, syncToken), formatting (valueFormat, useColumnNames), filtering (query formula syntax), and result limits.

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?

Despite the schema having descriptions for each parameter, the context signals indicate 0% schema description coverage (i.e., the tool description adds no value beyond schema). The description mentions 'optional filtering and sorting' only, which applies to two parameters but does not explain the other eight (docId, tableIdOrName, useColumnNames, valueFormat, visibleOnly, limit, pageToken, syncToken).

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 'List' and the resource 'rows in a table', with optional filtering and sorting. It distinguishes from siblings like coda_get_row (single row) or coda_delete_row, and from list operations on other resources like coda_list_tables or coda_list_columns.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as coda_get_row for a single row or coda_upsert_rows for batch operations. There is no mention of prerequisites or when not to use it.

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