List Annotation Data Types

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description confirms this is a read/list operation. It adds the useful fact that results are bare UUIDs rather than the IDs get_records expects, which is real behavioral context. It doesn't describe return shape, but an output schema exists so that burden is lifted.

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?

Front-loaded deprecation notice followed by the alternative and the contrast. Slightly wordy in the second sentence but every clause carries meaning, no filler.

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 zero-parameter deprecated list tool with an output schema, the description supplies the two things an agent actually needs: the replacement tool and the ID-format caveat. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately focuses on output semantics (bare UUIDs vs. get_records IDs) rather than parameter detail.

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 what the tool lists (older annotation types) and explicitly contrasts it with the replacement by scope (only older annotation types, bare UUIDs). The deprecated framing makes the resource clear. It stops short of a crisp standalone definition but is distinguishable from get_data_catalog.

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?

It explicitly routes the agent to get_data_catalog(category="user_defined") as the replacement and states why (that lists every user-defined type including Event/Metric, with the IDs get_records takes). The when-to-use alternative is named unambiguously.

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