teamleader_departments_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read-only list operation but does not mention pagination, response format, or any other behavioral traits. The schema hints at pagination via page/page_size, but the description adds nothing about behavior.

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 extremely concise ('List departments'), which is efficient, but it is under-specified rather than properly concise. It lacks important context, so while it earns points for brevity, it misses the mark on staying appropriately informative.

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 tool is a list operation with pagination parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not mention pagination behavior, response structure, or any notes about what 'departments' includes. Since there is no output schema, the description should provide more context for the agent.

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 50% (page_size has a description 'max 100', page does not). The description does not mention or explain either parameter. Since page lacks a schema description and the description does not compensate, the agent gets minimal guidance on parameter semantics.

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 'List departments' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the action and target. It distinguishes from sibling tools by the unique resource 'departments', though it lacks any extra context like scope or filtering.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states 'List departments' without any context, exclusions, or references to other tools.

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