list_docs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains filter behavior (substring matching for category, event code filtering) and the include_superseded flag, but does not mention read-only behavior, sorting, pagination, or potential large result sets. It adds some transparency via parameter explanations but lacks broader behavioral context.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a structured Args section. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repetition. It avoids unnecessary detail while providing useful examples.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and parameter semantics. It does not explain return value details (handled by output schema) or mention ordering/pagination, but these are not critical for a list tool. Overall, sufficiently complete for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

The input schema provides only titles and defaults, with zero descriptions. The description enriches each parameter: event with a concrete example, category with substring semantics and examples, and include_superseded with its purpose. This fully compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List documents' with specific optional filters (event and category), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like list_events by focusing on documents, and from read_doc by being a listing operation.

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 when you need a list of documents, and mentions filtering options, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like search or read_doc, nor does it state when not to use this tool. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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