list_escalation_policies

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, so description adds little beyond stating it returns a list. No mention of pagination behavior, default limit, or response format. But no contradictions.

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?

Two short sentences with no extraneous content. The 'Returns:' line is somewhat redundant but keeps it concise. Could be more informative without adding length.

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 presence of an output schema (indicated by context signals) and the complexity of a list tool, the description lacks crucial details like pagination limit (though present in schema), default behavior, and response structure. It is incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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% for the top-level parameter, and the description does not compensate. It only mentions 'optional filtering' without explaining the query_model structure, which is detailed in nested schema but still requires the description to bridge the gap.

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 states the tool lists escalation policies with optional filtering, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_escalation_policy, which retrieves a single policy.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_escalation_policy for a single policy). No exclusions or context for when filtering is beneficial.

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