brc_list_user_defined_fields

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, rate limits, or pagination behavior. It merely states the action without any additional context.

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 short (4 words), which is concise but under-specified. It loses points because it could have included more useful information without being verbose.

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 the tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not describe return values, pagination behavior, or any other context an agent needs to use the tool effectively.

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 input schema covers 43% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds no parameter-level details. While some parameters have descriptions in the schema (filter, orderBy, companyName), the overall description fails to explain how to use pagination parameters or any parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Lists BRC user defined fields' clearly states the verb and resource. However, among many list tools, it does not differentiate what 'user defined fields' specifically are, but it's sufficiently clear for an agent to understand the basic action.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context about when to choose this over other list tools like brc_list_analysis_categories or brc_list_products.

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