list-objectives

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action, omitting traits like read-only nature, pagination, ordering, or response structure. This is inadequate for safe invocation.

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 extremely concise (5 words), front-loading the action. It avoids unnecessary detail, but could benefit from slightly expanding on scope or optional filtering without becoming verbose.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter, but lacks an output schema and does not describe return values. For a list tool, the description is minimally adequate but fails to provide context about objectives or result format.

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% (the one parameter 'status' has a clear description and enum values). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting baseline expectations but not exceeding them.

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 states the verb 'List' and resource 'objectives in Shortcut', clearly indicating the action and scope. However, it does not differentiate from sibling list tools like 'list-epics' or 'list-projects', missing an opportunity to specify unique aspects.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With 18 sibling tools including many list operations, the agent has no context for selection, such as whether this lists all objectives or only unfiltered ones.

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