growsurf_list_campaign_rewards

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing the safety profile. The description enhances this by adding the defaulting behavior of campaignId, which is a behavioral detail not covered by the annotations. No contradiction exists.

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?

A single, concise sentence conveys the core purpose and defaulting behavior with no redundant words. The primary function is front-loaded, making it immediately scannable.

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 simple read-only list operation with one optional parameter and an output schema present, the description combined with the annotations and schema provides all necessary information. There are no gaps an agent would need to fill to call this tool correctly.

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 100% — the schema fully explains the parameter including its optionality and default. The description reiterates the same information without adding new semantic depth, so the baseline of 3 applies per the rubric.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'rewards' within a GrowSurf program. This semantically differentiates it from sibling tools like growsurf_create_campaign_reward, growsurf_update_campaign_reward, and growsurf_delete_campaign_reward by specifying a read-only listing action.

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?

Provides clear guidance on the optional campaignId parameter, explaining its defaulting to GROWSURF_CAMPAIGN_ID and how to use it for a newly created campaign without restarting the server. It does not explicitly mention when to avoid using this tool or name alternatives, but the purpose is so singular that the usage context is almost self-evident.

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