list_threads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the payload shape (memory counts, latest activity), but omits scope questions an agent would care about: whether threads span all users/workspaces, whether results are paginated, or whether any permission is required.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler that conveys both the action and the returned fields. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

With an output schema present and no parameters, the description need not detail return values or argument syntax. It is nearly complete for a simple read tool, with only the scope/pagination question left open.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain and the baseline 4 applies. The description correctly signals that no arguments are needed by framing it as a list-all operation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all conversation threads') plus what it returns (memory counts and latest activity). It is clearly distinguishable from get_thread by being a bulk listing, but it never names that sibling to make the distinction explicit.

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?

'List all' implies this is the unfiltered, enumerate-everything tool, which hints that get_thread is for single-thread retrieval. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement and no mention of alternatives anywhere in the description.

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