flat_list_collections

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden and does not meet it. "Lista" implies a read, but nothing is said about authentication requirements, whether the listing is paginated or complete, or whether it is scoped to the caller's account or broader — only the vague "da conta".

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?

A single short sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity contributes to the missing usage and behavioral detail rather than being purely a virtue.

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 no-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is minimally viable: an agent knows it returns account collections. It does not say what a collection object contains or how collections relate to scores and revisions, which would be needed to choose it wisely among the siblings.

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 takes zero parameters and the schema is empty with full coverage, so there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Baseline for a no-parameter tool applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Lista as coleções") and disambiguates the term by glossing it as "pastas" (folders of the account). It is clear on its own, but gives no hint about how it differs from sibling listing tools such as flat_list_scores or flat_list_revisions.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the other listing tools in the family, nor any prerequisite or context. The only guidance is implicit in the name; an agent must infer that collections are the top-level folder container.

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