list_labels

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 states the return type but does not disclose behavior of the arbitrary 'params' dictionary, pagination behavior, or potential errors. The read-only nature is implied but not explicitly stated.

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 compact, well-structured with Args and Returns sections, and contains no filler. Every sentence contributes useful information.

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 tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the 'params' dictionary is a black box, and the description does not specify supported query parameters or pagination, leaving a gap for the agent.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It clarifies project_id is a UUID and params are optional query parameters, but the dictionary contents are left undefined. This is minimal assistance beyond the schema.

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 all labels in a project' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from label-specific tools like create_label, retrieve_label, and list_release_labels by focusing on project-level label listing.

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 usage for listing labels in a project but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like list_release_labels. There are no stated exclusions or alternative conditions.

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