list_views

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-destructive, but the listing nature is clear. It adds context that the views are 'pre-built' and 'ready-to-run', which is helpful but not exhaustive.

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 concise with two main sentences and example queries. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. The examples could be considered extra but do not detract.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequately complete. It explains what is listed and how it can be used, meeting the minimum needs for an agent to select and invoke the tool.

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 tool has no parameters, so the description does not need to compensate. Schema coverage is 100%, baseline score is 4.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'all pre-built cost views'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_view' by noting that these views can be retrieved by name, implying the listing tool precedes retrieval.

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 explains that these are ready-to-run reports anyone can call via get_view(), and suggests using the list to paste into system prompts. It provides example queries, effectively guiding when to use this tool.

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