List Pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the ordering-by-sortOrder detail, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't disclose the return structure or whether pagination applies, though no output schema exists to compensate.

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?

A single clean sentence that conveys purpose and ordering. Zero wasted words. For a read-only list operation with one parameter, this is appropriately minimal.

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?

This is a simple read-only list operation with strong annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive) and a single well-named parameter. Given the low complexity, the description plus annotations provide adequate context. It could mention what a page represents or that navigation structure is involved, but for the operation's simplicity it's largely complete.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. The description indicates portalRef (the portal position) is the scope, and that results are ordered by sortOrder. However, it provides no detail about what 'sortOrder' means, what portalRef format is expected, or what the response looks like. The single-parameter nature keeps the burden modest.

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?

Description states 'List the pages of a portal, ordered by sortOrder' — a specific verb (list) + resource (pages of a portal) + ordering detail. It distinguishes from siblings like kilango_list_portals (lists portals, not pages) and kilango_get_page (single page), though doesn't explicitly name the alternatives.

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?

The description implies this is for retrieving pages within a portal context (requires portalRef), contrasting naturally with single-page retrieval tools like kilango_get_page. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives, or mention that this returns all pages rather than filtering.

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