co_list_collections

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 covered. The description adds the useful scoping detail 'in the current document' and enumerates collection types, but it does not disclose behavior like ordering, return shape, or whether hidden/empty collections are included.

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 sentence that front-loads the core action and scoping, followed by a useful list of collection types. There is no redundant or filler content.

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, safe read-only listing operation with fully documented parameters, the description covers the essential scope. There is no output schema, so a brief mention of what each returned collection entry contains could improve it, but the verb 'List' sufficiently implies a collection list.

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 100%, and the sole parameter include_counts has a thorough schema description including its performance tradeoff. The tool description itself does not need to repeat parameter details, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('collections in the current document'), and enumerates the collection types (albums, projects, groups, smart albums, catalog folders, session favorites). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like co_list_variants or co_list_documents.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as co_list_documents, co_set_current_collection, or co_list_variants. It only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context from sibling names.

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