microdata_list_extracts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the return content (extract numbers, status, basic metadata) but does not mention pagination behavior, ordering, or the exact time range for 'recent'. It is not misleading, but it leaves some behavioral details implicit.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and purpose. Every word adds value, and there is no redundant information.

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 list operation, the description covers the purpose and return content sufficiently. It lacks explicit details about pagination defaults or 'recent' semantics, but the schema provides pageSize/pageNumber, and the operation's simplicity reduces the need for deeper context. An output schema is absent, so the description must disclose return fields, which it does.

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 fully documents each parameter. The description adds only an example list of collection values, which overlaps with the enum in the schema. It does not enhance parameter understanding beyond 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists recent extracts for an IPUMS microdata collection, with examples (usa, cps, ipumsi). This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like microdata_create_extract or microdata_get_extract, which have different actions.

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 when to use this tool (to list extracts and see their status) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. The sibling context provides clear alternatives, but the description itself only hints at the use case.

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