Browse lists

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the available browsing sources but does not explain pagination behavior, authorization requirements, or what kind of list data is returned.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted language. It efficiently lists the supported browsing categories while staying appropriately short for a simple read-only tool.

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 read-only browse tool with annotations and a documented enum, the description is adequate but not complete. It does not clarify how this tool relates to sibling list tools such as get_user_lists, search_lists, or get_list, which could cause selection ambiguity.

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 description adds meaningful semantics for the required source enum by mapping top to top public lists, liked to your liked lists, official to official MDBList lists, and external to connected external lists. Limit and offset are left to the schema, which already documents their applicability to top, curated, and liked sources.

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 gives a clear verb-resource pair, 'Browse lists', and enumerates the five source categories the tool exposes. It is more specific than a generic list tool, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_user_lists or search_lists.

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 five source categories imply when each browsing mode is appropriate, especially for liked and external lists. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives such as search_lists or get_user_lists are named.

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