cja_list_dimensions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It mentions optional parameters and a return dictionary with list and count. It does not discuss permissions, rate limits, or error handling. The read-only nature is implied but not explicit.

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 concise, using a docstring format with Args and Returns sections. It includes example queries without being verbose. It is well-structured and easy to read.

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's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the description fairly covers the purpose and parameters. However, it lacks any mention of errors, performance, or limitations, which would be helpful for 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description explains the parameters 'dataview_id' (optional, uses default) and 'expansion' (additional fields) with an example. This adds useful meaning 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 that the tool lists all available dimensions in the CJA data view, with examples of what dimensions are. It distinguishes from siblings like list_metrics and list_segments by focusing on attributes that break down data.

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 explains when to use this tool (e.g., 'What dimensions are available?') and provides example queries. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast with alternatives like cja_search_dimension_items.

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