list_automations

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses read-only, safe to retry, max 10 concurrent requests, ordered by creation date descending, and explains lack of Customer Journeys endpoint. Fully transparent about 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?

Well-structured with clear sections: purpose, scope, alternatives, auth/limits, parameter descriptions, and return format. No unnecessary words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 simple parameters) and the presence of an output schema (described in the return format), the description covers purpose, usage, parameters, return format, and behavioral traits completely.

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 0%, but description adds parameter details: 'count: Automations to return (1-1000, default 20). offset: Pagination offset. Use when total_items exceeds count.' This explains range and usage beyond the schema's type and default.

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 'List Classic Automation workflows in the account with status and send counts.' It specifies the tool returns Classic Automations only, distinguishing it from Customer Journeys and other sibling tools like search_automation_campaigns and get_automation_emails.

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?

Explicit guidance on when to use: 'Returns Classic Automations only... Customer Journeys are NOT returned... To see what your Customer Journeys are sending, use search_automation_campaigns instead... Use get_automation_emails for individual emails within a Classic workflow.' Also mentions authentication and concurrency limits.

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