Publisher sets

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds real value beyond that by disclosing the return shape when `name` is supplied, including the meaning of sourceId as the published View Map view or layout.

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?

Three tight sentences, zero filler, with the primary behavior front-loaded and the conditional behavior and routing note following in priority order.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully documents the item shape returned in name mode. The list-only mode's return fields are left unspecified, a minor gap for a read tool with fully covered parameters and safety annotations.

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 all three parameters are already documented in the schema, setting the baseline at 3. The description reinforces that `name` switches the tool into item-expansion mode, but adds no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema's parameter descriptions already state.

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?

States a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('publisher sets of the project'), anchoring it to the UI location (Navigator > Publisher). It also distinguishes the two modes of operation (list-only vs. expanded with `name`), which no sibling does.

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?

Explains the conditional usage pattern clearly: pass `name` to also get the set's items, omit it to just list sets. The closing sentence points toward the publishing path ('Publish with the documentation tools'), implicitly routing to publish_publisher_set, though it does not name the sibling explicitly.

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