Text snippets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Lists' implies a read-only operation, but there is no disclosure of pagination, result limits, permissions, or whether the query filters server-side. For an unannotated tool this is a significant gap.

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?

A single efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource and wastes no words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool, though it could carry slightly more information without becoming bloated.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the core purpose is conveyed, but the sole parameter's meaning and the return shape (fields, pagination) are unaddressed. An agent can call it, but cannot confidently use the query filter or anticipate results.

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?

There is a single 'query' parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it or explains its matching behavior. With low coverage the description is expected to compensate, and it does not, leaving the only parameter entirely opaque.

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?

States a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('your firm's text snippets') and adds a clarifying gloss that these are reusable phrases/shortcuts, which distinguishes it from siblings like clio_notes_list or clio_letterheads_list. It does not explicitly name a sibling it differs from, so it falls short of a 5.

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 says only what the tool returns, with no guidance on when to call it, when to prefer an alternative, or any prerequisites such as authentication or firm scoping. Nothing tells the agent how this list tool relates to the many other list tools available.

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