get_governance_proposals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full disclosure burden. It only says 'Get... with pagination support,' omitting traits like read-only nature, side effects, performance implications (e.g., include_metadata slows down), or any error handling. The description is insufficient for behavioral understanding.

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 sentence, front-loading the core action and resource. It is concise and free of fluff, though it could benefit from additional context without becoming overly long.

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 has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain return values, pagination behavior in detail, or differentiate from similar tools. The omission of behavioral and output details leaves the agent under-informed.

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 description adds no meaningful parameter context beyond 'with pagination support.' The description does not clarify parameter interplay (e.g., page vs offset/limit precedence) or provide usage hints. Baseline score applied.

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 it retrieves Celo governance proposals with pagination, using a specific verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling 'get_proposal_details' (which likely returns a single proposal) but does not explicitly differentiate.

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_proposal_details'), no usage context or exclusions provided. The description only states its function without clarifying optimal invocation scenarios.

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