list_records

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as being read-only, rate limits, or side effects. It only mentions supported features, lacking transparency about what happens if module slug is invalid or pagination limits.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. No redundant information; every sentence adds value. Efficient and clear.

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 six parameters and no output schema, the description lacks completeness. It omits response structure, sorting behavior, default pagination values, and error handling. For a tool with significant parameterization, additional context is needed.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description mentions pagination and search, grouping parameters, but adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema's individual descriptions. No additional context for sortField or sortDirection.

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 tool lists records in a module, using a verb and resource. It specifies the required module slug and mentions pagination and search, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_record or list_module_fields.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives. It does not mention that get_record is for single records or list_module_fields for field metadata. The description only states what the tool does, not context for selecting it.

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