list_polls

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions that the tool shows poll questions, options, and vote counts, which gives some insight into the response. However, it doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, whether pagination exists, or how many polls are returned. For a simple list tool with no annotations, this is adequate but not rich.

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 concise, with two sentences explaining what the tool does and what is returned, followed by a clear Args list. No fluff, and the essential information is front-loaded. The structure is clean and 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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are already defined. The description provides enough context for a simple list operation with one parameter. It might be missing guidance on edge cases (e.g., no polls available), but for a straightforward list tool with a clear output schema, it is sufficiently complete.

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 schema has 0% coverage since no descriptions are provided in the schema properties. The description adds meaning to the school_id parameter by stating it is the 'School ID', which is not in the schema. With only one parameter and no enum constraints, a baseline of 4 is appropriate as the description fully clarifies the parameter's purpose.

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 'List' and resource 'polls for a school', and explains what the response contains (questions, options, vote counts). It is distinguishable from siblings like list_notices or list_signups, which are clearly different entities, though no explicit differentiation is provided.

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 implies usage: to list polls for a school. It states the required school_id parameter but does not provide any context on when to use this tool versus others (e.g., no mention of alternatives or prerequisites). The usage context is clear but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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