mdl_custom_lists_i_voted

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful non-obvious fact — that it requires host-configured MyDramaList authentication — but says nothing about pagination behavior or what the result set contains.

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 short clauses with no waste, and the identifying scope ('i voted') comes first. The auth requirement is placed last, which is acceptable for a prerequisite.

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 read-only, paginated list tool with full annotation coverage, the essentials are nearly there: identity, scope, and auth requirement. It still omits pagination guidance and does not clarify that the results are the authenticated user's own votes, which is the main ambiguity against the 'friends_voted' sibling.

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% and the description provides no information about the two parameters. Page and limit are conventional names, so an agent can guess their meaning, but nothing confirms pagination semantics, defaults, or bounds beyond what the raw schema shows.

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 the resource ('Custom Lists') and the scope ('i voted'), which lets an agent distinguish it from the similarly named mdl_custom_lists_friends_voted. However, it is phrased as a label rather than a verb+resource statement, so it never explicitly says it retrieves or lists anything, leaving the operation type implied.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as mdl_custom_lists_get_votes, mdl_custom_lists_friends_voted, or mdl_custom_lists_get_user_lists. The only conditional information given is the authentication prerequisite, which is a constraint rather than usage guidance.

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