persons_list

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explains pagination (start/limit) and filtering options, but omits details like default sort order, behavior of combined filters, rate limits, or authentication requirements. This is adequate but incomplete.

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 very concise, front-loading the main action in the first sentence, followed by a bulleted list of filters and a short pagination note. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and zero annotations, the description covers basics but lacks guidance on when to prefer this over search tools or other list variants. Edge cases (e.g., multiple filters) are not addressed, making it minimally adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by grouping filters and explicitly mentioning manual pagination with start/limit, which is not obvious from schema descriptions alone. This improves understanding of parameter usage.

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 all persons with optional filtering and pagination,' specifying the verb 'list' and resource 'persons.' The listed filters (user_id, org_id, first_char, filter_id) distinguish it from sibling tools like persons_list_activities or persons_list_deals.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description mentions optional filtering but does not direct the agent to more specific sibling tools (e.g., deals_list_persons for persons associated with a deal). No alternatives or exclusions are stated.

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