vibo_list_section_questions

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only safety is covered. The description adds valuable detail about the response structure (question type, options, answered status, current answer, progress), going beyond the schema and annotations.

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 sentences, no filler. The first sentence packs the core purpose and output details, the second provides a cross-tool usage pointer. Well-structured.

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?

With no output schema, the description effectively documents the return value by enumerating fields. Combined with readOnlyHint and clear parameter guidance, the tool is fully specified for an agent.

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?

Both parameters have full schema descriptions (eventId, sectionId), and the description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning. The sectionId description already references vibo_list_sections, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 DJ planning questions for a section, with specific fields returned. The verb 'List' plus resource 'section questions' distinguishes it from sibling tools like vibo_list_sections and vibo_get_section_songs.

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 provides workflow guidance by explicitly instructing to use the question _id and option _ids with vibo_answer_question, and the sectionId parameter references vibo_list_sections as a prerequisite. It lacks explicit alternatives but the cross-tool reference is strong.

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