list_entries_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states a generic listing action. It fails to mention key behaviors such as the default 'unread_only=true' filter, pagination via limit/offset, or how multiple filters are combined.

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 description is a single concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and easily readable, though it lacks detail that would make the extra brevity a strength.

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?

The description is too sparse for a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations. It omits crucial default behavior (e.g., unread_only defaults to true) and does not explain how filters interact or what the output represents. The presence of an output schema mitigates the need for return value details, but overall context is insufficient.

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%, with all five parameters well-documented including defaults and constraints. The description adds no extra parameter context, but the schema provides sufficient semantics, so the baseline score of 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 states the action 'list' and resource 'entries' clearly, with 'optional filters' indicating parametrization. It distinguishes from 'list_feeds_tool' by the resource type, though it does not explicitly contrast with 'search_entries_tool'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_entries_tool' or 'read_entry_tool'. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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