m3_flags

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It explicitly says 'Read-only', which is useful, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, response shape, or any limitations beyond what the schema already exposes.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded and the read-only note is immediately after the action, making the tool easy to scan among a long list of siblings.

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 tool, the description states what is returned and that the call is safe, which is the minimum viable. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it does not explain response contents, pagination defaults, or how the where/order GraphQL clauses should be used.

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?

Only order and where have schema descriptions; skip and take are undocumented. The description adds no meaning for any parameter and does not compensate for the missing semantics, leaving the agent to infer skip/take solely from their names.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and names a clear resource ('flags/labels used for document tagging'). It also distinguishes this tool from the many create/delete and other list siblings in the toolset. The read-only note reinforces the nature of the operation without blurring the purpose.

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 given about when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The phrase 'used for document tagging' implies a context, but there is no explicit statement that this is the canonical way to fetch valid flag values or how it relates to other list tools.

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