get_goals

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, default inclusion of completed goals, pagination, or permissions. It only says 'List Goals,' which is insufficient. The agent cannot infer side effects or constraints.

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 single sentence with no wasted words, but it is too brief, omitting critical details. It is concise at the cost of informativeness. A good balance would be slightly longer to include key usage notes.

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 tool has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should explain return format, default parameter behavior, and any limitations. It only states the basic function, leaving the agent uninformed about what to expect or how to use the parameters effectively.

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 description does not explain the parameters 'team_id' or 'include_completed.' The schema provides a fallback note for team_id, and include_completed has no description. The description adds no semantics; it merely mentions 'Workspace,' which is already in the schema. Schema coverage is 50%, but the description does not compensate.

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 action: 'List Goals in a Workspace.' The verb 'List' and resource 'Goals' are specific, and the context 'Workspace' is mentioned. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_goal' for single goal retrieval, so it lacks full differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., 'get_goal' for a single goal). There is no mention of prerequisites, default behavior, or exclusions. The description merely implies listing goals, leaving the agent without clear usage context.

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