List documents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false, covering safety. The description adds the filter options but no additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide, so the bar is met but not exceeded.

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 a single sentence of 21 words, front-loaded with the core purpose 'List documents of a given type'. Every part (filters, pagination) is essential and adds value, with zero fluff.

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 list tool with 17 parameters, rich schema, and annotations covering safety, the description adequately summarizes the filter capabilities and mentions pagination. It doesn't detail return structure but the schema covers pagination parameters, and annotations compensate for behavioral aspects.

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 17 parameters. The description summarizes the filter categories (series, number, client, etc.) but doesn't add meaning beyond the schema, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'documents' with a required type, and lists specific filters (series, number, client, date range, draft/cancelled, sorting, pagination). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_document (single) or create_document (creation).

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 usage for listing documents by type with optional filters, providing clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative tools, though the sibling list makes that implicit.

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