get_list_readrequest_page

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

With no annotations, description must carry burden. It specifies output format (CSV) and indexing (0-based) but omits details on error handling, auth, rate limits, size limits, or what happens if request is incomplete. Decent but incomplete.

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, no fluff, front-loaded with action and resource. 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?

No annotations and no output schema means the description should explain more about return value, error conditions, and usage sequence. Missing details like what happens on error, whether file is streamed, or how to handle multiple pages. Insufficient for a download 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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions. Description adds value by clarifying pageNo semantics (0-based) and confirming requestId provenance. No contradictions or redundancies.

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?

Description clearly states it downloads one page (CSV) from a completed large volume list read, with pages 0-based. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_list_readrequest (metadata) and delete_list_readrequest (cleanup), and implies the sequence of create, get pages, delete.

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?

Explicitly says to use delete_list_readrequest after all pages, providing a when-not. The context of 'completed large volume list read' implies do not use until request completed. Could be improved with direct mention of prerequisites or alternatives.

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