list_documents

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds that results are cached for 60 seconds and returns specific fields like creator and last editor, which helps the agent understand the tool's behavior and output characteristics.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and each sentence adds value: first states action, second details output and caching. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers purpose and output fields, but given there are three parameters and output schema exists, the lack of parameter details leaves the agent underinformed about pagination. With pagination parameters, a more complete description would include usage hints.

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?

The description does not mention any of the three parameters (page_size, project_id, page_number) despite schema coverage being only 33% (only project_id has a description). The agent receives no guidance on pagination or required inputs.

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 a project's documents' and details the returned fields including document identifiers that serve as inputs to other tools, effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_document or create_document.

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 does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives, though mentioning it returns 'inputs to the other document tools' implies a discovery use case. No direct exclusions or comparisons are provided.

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