List Records

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that: it says nothing about pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, or the effect of omitting optional parameters like filterByFormula or maxRecords. With annotations covering the safety profile, the description should add at least some operational context, but it contributes nothing.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and not verbose, but it is essentially a restatement of the tool name and title. It is appropriately sized for a minimal description, yet the sentence does not earn much value because it lacks any substantive detail for a 7-parameter tool.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, required IDs, and complex options like filterByFormula, sort, and view, the description is far too thin. It says nothing about filtering, sorting, or record ordering, and gives no usage context relative to siblings. Although an output schema exists and the input schema is well documented, the description fails to orient the agent about the tool's scope or capabilities.

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 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema (including a detailed note on the 'fields' parameter). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides. A baseline of 3 is appropriate when the schema fully carries the load.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List records from a table'), which is clear enough to understand the operation. However, it offers no differentiation from the closely related sibling search_records, which also returns records. Without that distinction, the purpose is clear but not fully disambiguated.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_records or get_record. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. An agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and schema.

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