List Collections (Paged)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., performance, default page size, or return format). No contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise at 5 words, with no waste. It is front-loaded and easy to scan. Could be slightly more informative (e.g., mention that it returns a paginated list of collections) without losing conciseness.

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?

Given 5 parameters fully documented in schema, annotations providing safety traits, and no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not explain default behavior (e.g., default page size, sorting) or mention the response structure. More context about the return format would improve completeness.

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 all 5 parameters described in detail. The description does not mention parameters, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is 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?

The description 'List collections with pagination support' clearly states the tool lists collections and specifies pagination, distinguishing it from other list tools through its title. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like transkribus_coll_list or transkribus_coll_list_by_name.

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 use when pagination is needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like transkribus_coll_list (non-paged) or transkribus_coll_list_for_user. No when-not or alternative suggestions are given.

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