list_long_term_summaries

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It implies a read-only operation and suggests using it to gather context. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, permissions, or the nature of 'generated' summaries, leaving some room for ambiguity.

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 sentences, each earning its place. The first states purpose, the second gives a key usage tip. No redundant information; front-loaded and compact.

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 list tool with 4 parameters and no annotations, the description is thin. It provides one useful tip but does not clarify the required project_id or the query filter. However, an output schema exists, so return values are covered elsewhere. Overall, adequate but with gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions page_size, giving it meaning ('to read all available interval context'). No explanation is provided for project_id, page, or query, leaving most parameters semantically unexplained.

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 a specific action ('List') and resource ('generated long-term (interval) summaries'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_chapter_summaries by specifying the 'long-term (interval)' type. The purpose is immediately clear.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Use page_size=100 to read all available interval context before writing.' This gives a clear scenario (before writing) and a specific parameter recommendation. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the context is actionable.

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