list_documents

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose pagination behavior, default ordering, rate limits, or what fields are returned. The description only says 'list documents', leaving basic behavioral traits unknown.

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 short sentence (9 words), which is concise. However, it may be too brief, sacrificing completeness that could fit in a sentence or two. Still, it is efficiently front-loaded.

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 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It does not explain pagination (despite a limit parameter), default sort order, or return structure. The description is insufficient for a list tool.

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%, so each parameter has a description. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond stating 'optional filtering'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as it neither adds nor detracts from schema information.

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 'list documents' with optional filtering by project or document type. It distinguishes from search_documents (which implies full-text search) and get_document (single document), though it lacks explicit scope like 'all documents in the workspace'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_documents or get_document. The description only implies usage through 'optional filtering', but does not specify when listing is preferred over searching.

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