workspace_list_reference_expansions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only listing operation but does not mention pagination, ordering, or what 'summaries' includes. There is no statement about side effects or return format, leaving significant ambiguity for an agent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the verb and resource immediately. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant elaboration. It is appropriately concise for a simple list operation.

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?

For a simple list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It tells the agent the action and the optional filter, but omits details like allowed state values, pagination behavior, or what constitutes a 'summary'. Given the simplicity, a score of 3 reflects that it is acceptable but leaves room for essential information.

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 has zero description coverage for the 'state' parameter, and the description only says 'optionally filtered by state' without explaining valid values or how the filter behaves. Since there are no enums and the type is anyOf string/null, the agent cannot infer what states are acceptable. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the parameter name.

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 the verb 'List' and the resource 'saved expansion summaries', with an optional filter by state. It is distinct from singular get_reference_expansion, but does not explicitly name alternatives or differentiate from other list tools like workspace_list_external_reference_resolutions.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where one would prefer the singular get_reference_expansion, nor does it clarify the distinction between listing summaries and retrieving full details. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is provided.

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