list_contexts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions 'advanced options including keywords, tags, categories, and date ranges', it doesn't address important behavioral aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are required, how results are ordered, or what happens when no filters are applied. For a tool with 8 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It wastes no words and directly communicates the tool's function, though it could be slightly more structured by separating the core action from the feature list.

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 tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'contexts' are in this system, what format results return, whether this is paginated (though offset/limit parameters suggest it is), or how filtering combinations work. The agent lacks sufficient context to use this tool effectively.

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 description mentions the filtering capabilities (keywords, tags, categories, date ranges) which aligns with some parameters, but with 100% schema description coverage, the schema already fully documents all 8 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline expectation when schema coverage is complete.

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 tool's purpose as 'Search and filter contexts with advanced options', which specifies both the verb (search/filter) and resource (contexts). It distinguishes itself from basic list operations by mentioning 'advanced options', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'search_contexts' tool, which appears to have overlapping functionality.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_contexts' or 'get_context'. It mentions 'advanced options' but doesn't clarify what makes this tool different from other context-related tools in the server, leaving the agent without clear selection criteria.

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