alltrails_list_trails_by_state

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

The description explains the read-only nature (listing), the paginated result structure (rich listing with specific fields), and the compact option effect. It adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, such as the exact fields returned and behavior of compact mode.

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 two sentences with no unnecessary words. Key information (purpose, input, output, optional compact mode) is front-loaded and efficiently conveyed.

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 no output schema, the description adequately describes the return format: rich paginated listing with specific fields, and the compact variant. This is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior and output.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema descriptions. It repeats parameter purposes (stateId, page, perPage, compact) and adds default values and max perPage, but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'List trails within a US state (or other region) by its numeric AllTrails state id,' specifying the verb (list), resource (trails), and input (state id). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like alltrails_list_trails_by_country and alltrails_search.

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 implies usage for listing trails by state id and mentions the compact option, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool compared to alternatives like alltrails_search or list_trails_by_country. Usage context is inferred rather than explicit.

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