checkvist_list_checklists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'for the authenticated user' and the ability to filter archived lists, which provides some context beyond annotations but is also present in the schema. No contradictions. It does not disclose return format, pagination, or other behavioral details, but given the strong annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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 two sentences long and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place; there is no redundant or extraneous information. It is concise yet informative.

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?

This is a simple list tool with no required parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects. The description adequately covers the main action and the optional archived filter. It does not mention pagination or sorting, but these are not essential for a straightforward 'get all' operation. It is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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%, so both parameters (archived and skip_stats) are documented in the schema. The description adds meaning to 'archived' by mentioning 'filter for archived lists' but does not clarify 'skip_stats'. Since the schema fully covers both parameters, the description's additional value is minimal, consistent with baseline 3.

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 'Get all checklists for the authenticated user', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like checkvist_get_checklist by emphasizing 'all' versus a single checklist. The additional mention of filtering for archived lists adds further clarity.

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 implies usage context: it is for listing all checklists, and the archived parameter is mentioned. However, there is no explicit comparison to alternatives (e.g., 'use this instead of checkvist_get_checklist for a single checklist') or any when-not-to-use guidance. The guidance is largely implied by the tool name and description.

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