kwfinder_lists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the operation without mentioning pagination, result format, rate limits, or any side effects, leaving the agent without critical behavioral 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It states the core purpose in a concise and clear manner, making it easy to parse.

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 collection endpoint with no output schema and no annotations, this description is incomplete. It fails to mention pagination, return fields, or any query parameters, leaving the agent without enough context to effectively use the tool.

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 description coverage is 100% because both parameters have generic descriptions. However, these descriptions are endpoint-agnostic ('Optional JSON request body', 'Optional query string parameters') and the tool description adds no specific information about supported query parameters, so the agent cannot infer valid arguments. The baseline of 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage but no added value.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get all') and resource ('KWFinder keyword lists'), clearly indicating a collection operation. The word 'all' helps distinguish it from sibling tools like kwfinder_list_items or kwfinder_create_list, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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, nor any prerequisites or context. There is no mention of how this differs from related tools like kwfinder_list_items or kwfinder_create_list, so an agent gets no usage direction.

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