List Shares

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

With readOnlyHint=true already covering safety, the description adds real behavioral context: the meaning of a `group_id` field, why the caller's own ID is returned, and the cross-tool handoff for reading another user's shares. It does not discuss pagination or result size, so not a full 5.

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 with the core purpose, then the parenthetical and group/ID notes in two further sentences. Each sentence carries information, though the final ID sentence is slightly incidental to the listing action.

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 single-parameter, read-only listing tool with an output schema, the description supplies the interpretive context an agent needs: what incoming vs outgoing entries mean, how to decode group_id, and how to use the returned user ID. 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?

The single `direction` parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage, enum of outgoing/incoming/both). The description's framing of two-way sharing aligns with the default 'both' but adds no new syntax or constraint beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

The first sentence gives a specific verb (List) and resource (shares) with an explicit two-way scope: what the user shares out and what others share with them. This clearly separates it from create_share, delete_share, and the group tools by describing the exact object it enumerates.

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 tells the agent how to act on results ('read it by passing their `sharing_fulcra_userid` as `fulcra_userid` to the file and data tools') and routes group-related entries to `get_groups`. It states clear context but stops short of explicit when-not/lookup-vs-write exclusion rules.

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