list_records

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only adds that drafts are included, but does not mention that the operation is read-only, default pagination behavior, or how results are ordered, which are critical for an agent to understand the tool's side effects.

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?

The description is a concise single sentence with no redundant words, front-loaded with the verb 'List'. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary detail.

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 the 5 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain pagination, filtering, or how to specify the collection, leaving the agent to infer critical usage details from the schema alone.

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 only 20%, and the tool description does not explain any parameters such as collection_id, limit, offset, or status. The only hint, 'includes drafts', is not tied to the status parameter and does not compensate for the lack of parameter documentation.

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 collection and highlights that drafts are included. This distinguishes it from get_record, which fetches a single record, and other list tools for different entities.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_record or similar list tools. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or specific use cases beyond the basic listing action.

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