hh_list_sections

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

Annotations already establish read-only and non-open-world behavior. The description adds useful return context that each section includes an endpoint count, but it omits auth, pagination, or ordering details; with an output schema present, the added behavioral value is modest.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Every clause contributes distinct information: the resource type and the per-section endpoint count.

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 low-complexity list tool with no parameters, read-only annotations, and an output schema, the description is largely complete. It could still mention any authentication or scope prerequisite implied by the presence of hh_check_auth.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and no semantic gaps exist.

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 and resource: listing API sections, plus the distinguishing detail that each section includes a catalog endpoint count. It is clear, but it does not identify sibling boundaries such as hh_get_section or hh_search_methods.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives. The list verb implies discovery usage, but nothing tells an agent when this is preferable to sibling tools like hh_get_section.

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