read_paged_request

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

No annotations, so description bears full burden. Discloses auto-paging and envelope expectation, but doesn't explain how it modifies requests (e.g., adding skip/take params) or rate limits.

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, front-loaded with key idea, no wasted words. Every sentence contributes essential information.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return behavior (original or paginated envelope). Does not cover error handling or edge cases, but sufficient for typical use.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but description adds significant value by explaining the tool's purpose and expected return format, which is not in the schema.

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 auto-pages read-only GET endpoints that use skip/take, giving specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like read_request by focusing on paging.

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?

Provides explicit use cases (list-style GET endpoints) and explains the expected response envelope. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but context with siblings makes it clear.

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