Get User Lists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that three categories of lists are returned, but says nothing about permissions (can any username be queried?), pagination, or result size for a potentially large collection.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the clarifying parenthetical placed immediately after. No waste or filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the single-parameter read surface is simple. The only meaningful gap is the absence of authorization/pagination context for reading another user's lists, which the description does not cover.

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% for the single 'username' parameter, so the schema already supplies its meaning. The description adds no format, casing, or lookup-constraint detail beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Get all lists for a user') with a clarifying parenthetical that disambiguates what 'lists' covers (saved places, created lists, followed lists). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get_list_detail, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by the user-scoped retrieval framing, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of when to prefer get_list_detail for a single list. Nothing misleading, but the agent must infer the boundary itself.

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