quire.listPartners

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond clarifying the resource type. No details about permissions, rate limits, or return format are provided, but the description is consistent with annotations.

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 sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 lack of an output schema, the description could mention the return type (e.g., 'returns a list of partner objects'), but for a simple list operation, the current description is largely sufficient. It does not cover potential edge cases or error states.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for projectId. The description does not add any parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, so it merits the baseline score.

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 lists external teams (partners) in a project. It uses a specific verb 'list' and identifies the resource as 'external teams (partners)', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like quire.getPartner (single partner) and quire.listProjectMembers (members vs. partners).

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 explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like quire.getPartner or quire.listProjectMembers. While the term 'partners' implies a different entity, there is no guidance on when one is preferred or excluded.

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