teamleader_teams_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely says 'List teams,' implying a read-only operation, but does not explain return format, pagination behavior, permissions, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's 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 at two words, with no wasted words, but it borders on under-specification. It is front-loaded with the main purpose but lacks any supporting details, making it less effective than a well-structured description with necessary context.

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 list tool with two pagination parameters and no annotations or output schema, this description is too thin. It does not mention that results are paginated, what page/page_size control, or the response format, leaving the agent to infer critical usage details.

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?

The schema description coverage is 50% (page_size has a max-100 note, page has none). The description adds no meaning about either parameter, so an agent must rely solely on the parameter names. Given the partial schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 specifies the action (list) and resource (teams), but it essentially restates the tool name 'teamleader_teams_list' without adding detail about scope, filtering, or output format. It is clear but minimal, and while it distinguishes from siblings by naming a different entity, it does not go beyond that.

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 about when to use this tool versus other list tools such as teamleader_tickets_list or teamleader_projects_list. There is no mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or typical use cases.

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