list_documents

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, description reveals that the first call per project triggers a discovery scan cached for 60 seconds, adding valuable behavioral context about initialization and caching 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?

Two concise sentences front-loaded with purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, return fields, caching note. No redundancy.

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?

Explains return values and caching. With an output schema present, return values are adequately covered. Could be more explicit about pagination behavior, but overall sufficient for a list tool.

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 only 33% (only project_id has a description). The description does not add any parameter-specific details beyond the schema; it fails to explain page_size and page_number semantics explicitly.

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?

Explicitly states 'List all documents in a Polarion project' and specifies returned fields (space_id, document_name, type). Clearly differentiates from sibling tools like list_document_comments or list_document_enum_options.

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?

Indicates that returned identifiers (space_id, document_name) are accepted by other document tools, implying this tool is a prerequisite. Mentions first-call discovery scan caching, but does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternative tools.

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