List Onshape documents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the default ordering ('most recently modified first') and the scope ('visible to the signed-in user'), which are useful. However, it doesn't disclose pagination behavior, whether the result is a list of summaries or full documents, or any rate-limit considerations. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

One sentence with zero waste. It front-loads the action, resource, and scope, and includes the key default behavior. Every word earns its place.

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?

Complete for a simple list tool whose annotations already carry the safety profile. The schema covers all parameters, and the description covers scope and default ordering. The only minor gap is the lack of an output schema or a note about the return shape, but for a list operation this is not critical.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description adds the default ordering context ('most recently modified first') which aligns with sort_by=modifiedAt and sort_order=desc, but doesn't add syntax or format details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is correct when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('documents visible to the signed-in user'), and a distinguishing behavior ('most recently modified first'). It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like onshape_search_documents and onshape_get_document.

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 implies the tool is for listing documents visible to the user, which is clear context. It does not explicitly mention when to use it over onshape_search_documents or onshape_get_document, but the scope ('visible to the signed-in user') and default ordering provide enough context for an agent to select it appropriately.

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