Query supporters

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description adds real value: paging behavior (100 at a time), the returned fields (IDs plus created/modified dates), and the privacy-relevant gating of email behind include_contact_details. It stops short of stating auth requirements or rate limits.

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 dense paragraph that front-loads the query modes and is free of filler, with every clause earning its place. It reads as a run-on sentence, which slightly hurts scannability, but nothing is wasted.

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?

For a 7-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the mode-specific requirements, the filter syntax, the return shape, and pagination. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and interpret the results.

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 coverage is already 100% (baseline 3), but the description goes beyond it by decoding the filter mini-language: ':' as equals, '||' as OR between values, '~' as AND, with a concrete example. It clarifies cross-parameter dependencies (filter is only for type 'search', profile_id only for type 'profile') that the flat schema cannot express.

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?

States a specific verb (list) plus resource (supporters) and enumerates the five query modes (latestCreated, latestModified, suppressed, profile, search) that define what the tool can do. This is far more than a restatement of the name and lets an agent immediately distinguish this broad query tool from the sibling find_supporter.

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?

Gives clear per-mode selection guidance and prerequisites ('profile' needs profile_id, 'search' needs filter, days_back 1-32). It does not explicitly name alternatives such as find_supporter or explain when NOT to use this tool, so it falls short of the 5 bar.

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