skylight_list_auto_creation_intents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered and there is no contradiction. The description adds only that results are scoped to a single frame; it says nothing about pagination, result volume, ordering, or whether intents are mutable after listing.

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 front-loaded sentence with the verb and resource first and the clarifying parenthetical second. No filler, though the parenthetical is doing double duty as both scope clarification and use-case hint.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of describing returns; it does mention "their ids" but does not describe the shape of an intent, its status field, or counts. Combined with the undocumented frameId parameter, an agent has only a partial picture of what comes back.

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 0% and the single frameId parameter is entirely undocumented in the schema. The description only obliquely implies a frame scope ("on the frame") without naming frameId, stating that it is optional, or indicating what happens when it is omitted. With one undocumented parameter, the description fails to compensate for the coverage 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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List all AI auto-creation intents on the frame") and clarifies the resource with a parenthetical ("pending/completed drafting jobs and their ids"). The plural "List all" implicitly distinguishes it from the singular sibling skylight_get_auto_creation_intent, though it never names that sibling or the related list_auto_creation_drafts/items tools.

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 parenthetical ("find pending/completed drafting jobs and their ids") implies the use case of discovering intents to act on, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or routing against alternatives like skylight_get_auto_creation_intent, skylight_list_auto_creation_drafts, or skylight_list_auto_creation_items. Usage is inferable but not stated.

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