swapcard_list_event_documents

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't mention pagination behavior, authentication requirements, rate limits, or what happens when no documents exist. The 'List all' wording could suggest it returns all at once, but with a 'page' parameter available, pagination is implied but not explained.

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?

Single sentence, direct, and to the point with no fluff or unnecessary words. Extremely concise, though it could argue that it's under-specified rather than concise.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and a very brief description, the description provides minimal context. It's a simple list operation, but with pagination parameter available, the description could have added clarity on page size, pagination format, or whether it returns metadata like total count. The absence of such details makes it incomplete for effective use.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the description adds no documentation for the parameters beyond their basic schema (page: number, eventId: string). It doesn't clarify the format of 'page' (e.g., 1-indexed, page size) or what 'eventId' references. The description could have explained the meaning of 'page' in the context of listing, but it remains silent.

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 'List all documents attached to an event' clearly states the verb (List) and the resource (documents attached to an event). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like swapcard_create_event_document and swapcard_delete_event_documents by indicating this is the read operation, though it doesn't explicitly name them as alternatives.

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?

It implies usage for listing documents but doesn't elaborate on when to use this versus alternatives. The description does not specify when not to use it or name alternative tools that could achieve document retrieval. It serves the basic purpose without offering additional guidance.

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