list_teams

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals pagination behavior and provides examples, which is helpful. However, it doesn't cover aspects like rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling, leaving gaps for a mutation-free but operationally complex tool.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by concise examples that illustrate usage without redundancy. Every sentence earns its place, making it efficient and well-structured.

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's complexity (pagination, organizational structure) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the core functionality and usage, though it could benefit from more behavioral context given the lack of annotations.

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 the schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by implying pagination usage in examples, but doesn't provide additional semantic context like parameter interactions or constraints.

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 verb 'retrieve' and resource 'paginated list of teams with organizational structure', making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_team_members' or 'list_meetings', which would require 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?

The description provides usage examples but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_team_members' or 'search_meetings'. It mentions pagination but doesn't specify contexts where this tool is preferred over siblings.

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