List households

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds the underlying call (GET /api/v1/circles with include=accounts), which hints at the payload shape, but does not add rate-limit, pagination or auth context beyond that.

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 tight sentences with zero filler: the first establishes what a circle is and what is returned, the second covers filtering and the API backing. Front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned attributes (names, portal access, engagement rating) and the include=accounts basis. Aggregate observability (pagination across the 100-per-request batching) is left to the schema's max_results note, so it is nearly but not entirely self-contained.

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 all five parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description only loosely echoes the name/member filters. Baseline 3 applies; it adds no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields.

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 names a specific verb and resource and even resolves the domain term ('Circles (households and other groups of client accounts)'), plus states what each result contains: member names, portal access and engagement rating. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the closely named sibling get_household, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

'Filter by name or member account' implies when the tool is useful, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative (e.g. 'use get_household for a single circle'). Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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