List Canva designs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true; the description's 'Read-only' merely repeats that, though 'free' adds a cost signal not in annotations. It also discloses the default ordering (newest first), which is useful, but says nothing about pagination behavior or rate limits.

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?

Front-loads the resource and its return fields, then packs filters compactly. The telegraphic enum listings are slightly dense and border on duplicating the schema, but no sentence is pure filler.

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 no output schema, the description usefully lists the returned fields, and it covers the free/read-only nature and default ordering. It omits any mention of continuation/pagination in the description, which an agent needs for iterating beyond the default limit of 25.

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 is 100%, so the schema already documents query, ownership, sort, limit, and continuation (including enum descriptions). The description restates the query semantics ('matches titles and content') and enumerates the same enum values, adding only the 'newest first' default, which is marginal value over the schema.

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 ('The user's Canva designs') and enumerates what each design record contains (title, page count, edit link, view link, design id). It implicitly separates itself from list_canva_folder and list_canva_brand_templates by naming 'designs', but never names a sibling outright.

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?

Usage is only implied through the query and ownership parameters ('query matches titles and content', 'ownership any|owned|shared'). There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus list_canva_folder, list_canva_brand_templates, or export_canva_design, and no prerequisites given.

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