lc_list_schemas

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

The description only says 'List', implying a read operation, but with no annotations provided, it fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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, which is concise, but it is too brief and leaves out important details that would help an AI agent, given the lack of annotations and parameter descriptions in the schema.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters with no descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema. The description only covers the basic purpose and a hint of two parameters, leaving the return format and parameter semantics incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates by linking 'oid' to 'for an org' and 'platform' to 'optionally filtered by platform', but it does not explain the 'limit' parameter or the format of platform values.

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 'event schemas for an org', and mentions an optional platform filter. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling 'lc_get_schema' which likely retrieves a single schema.

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 that the tool is used to list schemas for an org with an optional platform filter, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'lc_get_schema' or other list tools.

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