cigchat_team_labels

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the HTTP method (GET), the endpoint, and the required OAuth scope, which are important behavioral/security traits. It does not describe return format or pagination behavior, but for a simple read-only list tool the provided context is substantial.

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, information-dense sentence. It states the action, endpoint, and auth requirement with no filler, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 simple list endpoint with optional filters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, the endpoint, and required permissions. It does not describe the response fields, but that is not critical for a list operation. The explicit scope requirement and endpoint compensate for the lack of annotations.

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?

All three parameters (name, page, limit) have descriptions in the input schema, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get list of labels' with the specific endpoint '/team/labels', identifying both the action and resource. The tool name 'cigchat_team_labels' and endpoint distinguish it from sibling tools for creating/deleting labels and from product tag list tools.

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 a clear prerequisite: 'Requires the Manage Team scope on the token,' which tells the agent when the tool can be used. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the endpoint and name make the context unambiguous.

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