surveymonkey_list_contact_lists

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates a read-only listing behavior and reveals pagination via page/per_page defaults, but it does not mention response structure, ordering, permissions, or any rate-limit implications. This is adequate for a simple list tool but not richly transparent.

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 compact sentences, front-loading the core purpose first and then documenting the two parameters. Every sentence is informative and there is no filler or redundancy.

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 tool has only two optional parameters, no nested objects, and an output schema is present, so the description need not detail return values. The purpose and pagination behavior are covered, and sibling context is not needed for correct invocation. It is nearly complete, with only minor missing context around response shape or usage scenarios.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain both parameters: 'Page number' and 'Results per page', adding meaningful semantics beyond the bare schema titles and defaults. It does not specify constraints like minimum/maximum values, but the simple pagination parameters are well covered.

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 ('Lists') and a specific resource ('all contact lists in the account'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. The phrase 'contact lists' distinguishes it from sibling tools like surveymonkey_list_contacts, which lists individual contacts.

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 clearly implies this is the go-to tool for enumerating all contact lists in the account, but it does not explicitly explain when to prefer it over alternatives such as surveymonkey_get_contact_list or surveymonkey_list_contacts. There are no explicit usage exclusions or alternative routing.

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