growsurf_list_program_resources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, which cover the safety profile. The description adds extra behavioral value by noting 'including drafts' and 'results stay in display order', plus the default targeting behavior, enriching the agent's understanding beyond the structured annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, then two relevant behavioral details. There is zero redundancy and every sentence contributes to the agent's ability to use the tool correctly.

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 low-complexity tool with a single optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers purpose, scope (including drafts), ordering, and default targeting. Nothing necessary for correct invocation is missing, and the output schema handles return-value details.

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% since the single parameter campaignId has a thorough description explaining the default and how to pass a newly created campaign ID. The tool description merely restates this default targeting behavior without adding new information, so it provides no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 participant resources for a GrowSurf program, including drafts. It identifies the resource type and the action (list) precisely, and this distinguishes it from sibling tools that list campaigns, participants, or rewards.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool (listing program resources) without naming alternatives or exclusions. It doesn't explicitly say 'use this instead of X', but the specificity of 'participant resources' makes the usage unambiguous among the many sibling tools.

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