list_visuals

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns name, type, and position, which is useful. However, it does not mention potential side effects, required permissions, error behavior, or the role of reportSessionId. For a simple read-only list operation, some of this is less critical, but the description could be more explicit about the session context.

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 wasted words. The key information is front-loaded: 'List the visuals on a page'.

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 simple list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the basic purpose and return fields. However, it omits essential context such as what reportSessionId is and any assumptions about the page context. It is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 50% (pageName has a description, reportSessionId does not). The description does not clarify reportSessionId at all, and its mention of 'on a page' merely echoes the pageName description. It adds no new parameter semantics.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('visuals on a page'), and the scope ('name, type, position'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'add_visual' and 'delete_visual', and its specific focus on listing visuals differentiates it from 'list_visual_properties'.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need to enumerate the visuals on a specific page. It provides clear context (a page) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use list_visual_properties for detailed properties'.

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