List battle passes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds value by explaining that the tool returns ids/slugs and requires prior login, which is useful behavioral context not present in annotations."

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 long with the main action in the first sentence. Every word serves a purpose: stating the action, specifying return value, and noting a prerequisite. No redundancy or unnecessary detail."

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 explains the return value (ids/slugs) and prerequisite, which is helpful given no output schema. However, it omits details on pagination (limit) and filtering (search), leaving gaps for a list operation with those parameters."

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 projectId has a description). The description adds no parameter information, such as meaning of limit or search. With low coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so."

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 the tool lists battle passes from a Specter project and specifies that it returns ids/slugs for use in creating other entities. This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like specter_list_bundles or specter_list_currencies."

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 notes a prerequisite (requires a one-time browser sign-in via specter_login) and implies usage when needing ids/slugs for entity creation. While it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, the provided context is clear enough for an agent."

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