lc_list_payloads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It only states it does not download bytes but does not disclose permissions, rate limits, side effects, or return format. Minimal behavioral transparency.

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 sentence of 10 words, highly concise but borderline under-specified. It is front-loaded with the key action, but could include more useful details without becoming verbose.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not describe what metadata includes, ordering, pagination, or how it differentiates from many sibling list tools. Lacks completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the parameters (oid, limit) beyond their schema definitions. It adds no meaning to the parameters, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 it lists payload metadata without downloading bytes, using specific verb 'List' and resource 'payloads', and differentiates from other payload tools by noting the no-download aspect.

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 implies usage when only metadata is needed, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like lc_get_payload_download_url. No when-not or alternative tool names are provided.

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