subsprint_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'compact rows', which hints at output formatting but does not clarify ordering, filtering, or whether the result includes all subsprints or a paginated subset.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core action and adds one meaningful qualifier ('compact rows').

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 simplicity (zero parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. However, 'compact rows' is vague about what the response looks like, and without an output schema, a bit more detail on the return format would improve completeness.

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?

The tool accepts no parameters, so the description has no obligation to explain parameter semantics. The empty schema fully covers the parameter side, and the description is consistent with that.

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 'list' and the resource 'subsprints', with the additional detail 'compact rows' that distinguishes this tool from other subsprint operations like subsprint_get or subsprint_new.

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 plural 'list' implies use for viewing multiple subsprints, and the name aligns with collection-style tools. However, there is no explicit mention of when to use this vs. subsprint_get or other alternatives, and no exclusions are stated.

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