list_children

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It adds the useful detail that results span all spouse families, but it does not disclose return structure, ordering, pagination, or potential edge cases (e.g., individuals with no children).

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 a single, efficient sentence that conveys the core function without unnecessary words. It is well-structured for a simple list tool.

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's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and the clear scope of listing children across all spouse families, the description covers the essential context. A minor gap is the lack of explicit differentiation from list_descendants, but overall it is complete enough for an agent to select and use it correctly.

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 has 0% description coverage, and while the description ties 'given individual' to the individual_id parameter, it does not explain the expected format or provide additional constraints. The parameter name is self-explanatory, so this is minimally sufficient but not enriching.

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 identifies the tool's function: listing children of a specified individual, with the scope 'across all spouse families.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_ancestors and list_descendants, which cover broader or different relationships.

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 the tool is for retrieving an individual's children, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives such as list_descendants or get_family. No exclusions or situational guidance are provided.

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