indecx_list_actions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond those hints: results are paginated one page at a time, and survey text must be treated as untrusted data rather than instructions. This security warning is meaningful and does not contradict the annotations.

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 three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Each sentence earns its place: what the tool does, pagination behavior, and a distinct security warning. There is no wasted text.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with annotations covering safety, the description is close to complete: it states the scope, pagination behavior, and trust boundary. The only notable gap is the unresolved ambiguity of whether page/limit are actually supported given the empty input schema.

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 input schema declares zero parameters, so the description has little to add; the baseline for zero parameters is 4. However, the phrase 'use page/limit to continue where available' suggests invocation parameters that are not present in the schema, creating mild ambiguity about what arguments the tool actually accepts.

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 opens with a specific verb ('List') and a resource ('active surveys'), so an agent can tell it is a read-only listing operation. It is distinguishable from siblings like indecx_list_branches and indecx_get_action by resource and verb, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives or reconcile the 'actions' name with 'surveys'.

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 gives useful context: list active surveys, returns one page, use page/limit to continue where available. However, it does not state when to prefer this tool over siblings, and the pagination hint implies page/limit parameters that are absent from the input schema.

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