get_list_views

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, and the description accurately conveys that no side effects occur. It does not explicitly state 'read-only' or mention permissions, but for a simple list operation this is sufficient. No contradiction with 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?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences with no unnecessary words. The first states the action and output, the second explains the use case. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers all necessary information: what it does, what it returns, and why to use it. No gaps or missing 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 coverage for parameters is 100%: the single parameter list_id is well-described in the schema. The tool description adds context about view types (List, Board, Calendar, etc.) but does not expand on parameter format or constraints beyond the schema, so the value added is minimal. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 Views configured on a List, specifying the resource and output (each View's id and type). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_space_views or get_folder_views by focusing on a specific list, and provides a concrete use case: finding a view_id for reading tasks.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool: to find a view_id for reading tasks. While it doesn't mention when not to use it or provide alternatives to similar tools, the context is clear enough for an agent to make appropriate decisions.

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