list_server_responses

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states it 'gets all server responses' without disclosing behavior like ordering, pagination limits, or whether responses are returned all at once. Lacks critical operational details.

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?

Single sentence of 7 words is very concise. For a simple list tool, this may be acceptable, though a second sentence on return format would improve conciseness without much added length.

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 exists, so description should indicate return type (e.g., 'returns an array of server responses'). Also lacks mention of any optional parameters or defaults. The tool is minimal but incomplete for agent understanding.

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?

Input schema has one parameter (mockId) with a clear description. Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds no extra meaning beyond confirming the parameter's purpose. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states 'Get all server responses for a mock', indicating a list operation for a specific mock. It implicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_server_response (single item) and create/delete/update, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as get_server_response. No mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or any context about filtering or pagination.

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