list_globals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds meaningful context that globals live outside the page tree, are not blocks, and behave like ordinary documents for editing. It does not cover return shape or ordering, but as a list tool with annotations the bar is low.

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 tight sentences, zero filler: the identity/scope comes first, then the crucial structural fact, then the editing route. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only enumeration tool with annotations covering safety and a fully documented parameter, the description supplies the key structural insight (globals are not in the tree/blocks) plus editing guidance. The only mild gap is the absence of any return-shape note, though the examples imply the item type.

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% and the single 'site' parameter is fully documented in the schema (including the multisite default and the list_sites hint). The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (List) and resource (this site's global singletons), with concrete examples (header, footer, site settings). It explicitly differentiates from sibling concepts by noting globals are NOT in the page tree and are not blocks.

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?

Explicitly says this is the only way to enumerate globals, ruling out list_pages/list_blocks/tree for this content type, and it routes the agent to the follow-up editing tools (get_content/update_content/set_field on the documentId), matching the sibling set.

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