followups_list

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

The description clarifies that calls without analysis are not returned and an empty list is not an error. With no annotations provided, this adds some behavioral context. However, it does not mention permissions, idempotency, or performance characteristics.

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 two concise sentences without extraneous information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it omits important context that could be added without losing conciseness.

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 has three parameters, no annotations, and an output schema exists, the description leaves gaps. It explains the return condition (only calls with analysis) but lacks information about required permissions, parameter interactions, or typical use cases.

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 indirectly relates to the 'days' parameter by mentioning 'window', but does not explain the parameters in detail. Only one of three parameters (user_id) has a description in the schema, and the tool description adds minimal additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 states it returns 'completed calls with ready AI analysis', which clearly identifies the resource and action. It distinguishes itself from sibling 'followup_get' by implying a list operation. However, it could be more explicit about listing vs. retrieving a single item.

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 tool versus alternatives like 'followup_get' or other list tools. It does mention that an empty list is normal behavior, which is helpful but does not address use case differentiation.

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