get_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral traits. It only states the basic operation and return values (code, name, UUID). It does not disclose side effects, read-only nature, performance implications, or any other behavioral aspects beyond a simple list retrieval.

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 consists of two sentences that are concise, front-loaded, and contain no superfluous information. Every sentence adds value: first explains the purpose, second specifies the return format.

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 the complexity of 4 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is lacking. It does not explain the format or syntax of the filter, how pagination works with offset/limit, or what to do if the type (full_name) is unknown. The minimal return description is helpful but incomplete for effective use.

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% (all parameters have descriptions). The description adds a summary that the tool supports pagination and filtering, but it does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already conveys for parameters like filter, limit, offset. It mentions return fields but not param semantics.

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 verb 'Получить список' (get list) with a specific resource 'объектов заданного типа' (objects of a given type) and mentions pagination and filtering. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_document_list or get_object_attributes by focusing on a generic object list with pagination.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_document_list, search_metadata). It lacks explicit context for when the tool is appropriate or when to choose another. No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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