lc_list_saved_queries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. For a listing tool, it likely performs a read, but this is not stated. The description lacks behavioral context.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence. While it is front-loaded and to the point, it sacrifices important details. It could be expanded slightly to include parameter hints or usage context 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 that there is no output schema, no annotations, and parameters are undocumented, the description is insufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly. It does not explain return format, pagination, or error scenarios. Compared to sibling tools with more detailed descriptions, this is lacking.

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%, and the description does not explain the two parameters (oid and limit). Oid is likely an identifier for the query hive or organization, but no clarification is given. Limit defaults to 100, but its meaning is only implied. The description adds no value beyond the schema names.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'saved LCQL queries' with the location 'query hive'. It distinguishes from siblings like lc_get_saved_query (which retrieves a single query) and lc_execute_saved_query (which executes one). However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself, but the purpose is specific enough.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like lc_get_saved_query or lc_execute_saved_query. There is no mention of appropriate contexts, prerequisites, or when not to use it. The description solely states what it does without any usage direction.

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