list_collections

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

With readOnlyHint=true already declared, the description adds little behavioral detail beyond scope (all collections). It doesn't mention pagination, ordering, or other runtime behaviors, but the annotation covers safety. This is consistent with the high-calibration example where annotations lower the bar.

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 a single, well-structured sentence with the key action ('Retrieve all Metabase collections') front-loaded. It conveys purpose and usage without unnecessary 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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description provides sufficient context. Combined with the schema's parameter description and the readOnlyHint annotation, an agent has everything needed to invoke the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100% because the only parameter 'archived' is fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Retrieve all Metabase collections for organizing analytical content.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing 'all' collections, which separates it from tools like search_content or get_collection_items.

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 tells the agent when to use this tool: 'use this to understand content structure, find collections, or explore organizational hierarchy.' It provides clear context but doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which prevents a 5.

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