list_approval_gates

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose an entitlement gate (Business tier required), which is real behavioral value, but gives no output shape, pagination, or error behavior when the tier check fails, and one sentence is upsell narrative rather than tool behavior.

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 core action is front-loaded in the first sentence, which is good. But roughly half the text is upsell copy and a pricing URL that does not help an agent decide or invoke, and the tier requirement is repeated twice.

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?

Two undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description says nothing about the returned gate objects or filter semantics. For a list tool the agent has no idea what fields come back or how to narrow results.

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% for artifact_id and artifact_type, and the description compensates only with the phrase "optionally filtered." It never explains what the filters scope to, whether artifact_type constrains artifact_id, or what happens if both are omitted.

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?

A clear verb plus resource ("List every configured approval gate") with a note that filtering is optional. It does not name or differentiate from the obvious siblings set_approval_gate / remove_approval_gate, so the agent must infer that this is the read-only counterpart.

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 tier prerequisite ("Requires Kiln Business", "Business+ tier") is stated twice and is genuinely useful gating context. Beyond that there is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says to call this before set_approval_gate, whether an empty result is normal, or what to do without a Business tier.

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