list_capabilities

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: the limit cap and pagination mechanism using next_offset. However, it does not mention filtering behavior for 'project' and 'capability_id' parameters, auth needs, or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides essential behavioral detail about pagination. Every word earns its place.

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 description lacks details on filtering parameters and does not mention the return format or output structure. Given 4 parameters and no output schema, more completeness is needed for a listing 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds some meaning for 'limit' (cap) and 'offset' (pagination), but 'project' and 'capability_id' parameters are not explained. The value added is partial.

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 'List API capabilities exposed by OpenProject,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_projects or list_categories, which list different entities.

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 provides pagination guidance (limit cap and offset usage) but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear for pagination but lacks explicit usage scenarios.

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