whodb_platform_transforms

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world behavior, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds non-obvious traits: "type maps to trigger mode for this tool" (a parameter reinterpretation) and that workspace targeting applies "without changing defaults" (non-persistent session behavior). It does not mention result volume or pagination, which is a minor remaining gap.

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?

Three tight sentences: resource/scope first, filter behavior second, per-call targeting last. No filler or restatement of the tool name, and each sentence carries information the agent needs.

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?

For a 10-parameter, zero-required list tool with a nested workspace object and no output schema, the description covers list semantics, filter intent and workspace targeting adequately; pagination and field-selection behavior are left entirely to the schema, which documents them well.

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%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that the generic 'type' filter maps to transform trigger mode here, and that the nested workspace object is per-call only and does not alter session defaults.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List transforms") plus the scope ("in the selected hosted project"), which distinguishes it from the singular whodb_platform_transform and the run-oriented siblings. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, so it falls short of full sibling differentiation.

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?

"Use name and type filters when known" gives filter-level guidance, and the workspace sentence explains per-call targeting semantics, but nothing states when this list tool is preferable to whodb_platform_transform, transform_runs, or transform_preview. Usage context is implied rather than prescribed.

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