list_personas

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden alone. It does reveal that results are ordered by commonality, but it doesn't state whether this is a read-only operation, how results are returned, how query and top affect output, or any pagination/limits beyond the schema.

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 concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. However, the ordering detail is appended without adding much actionable substance, so it is efficient but not information-dense.

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 listing tool with no output schema and minimal parameter information, this definition is underpowered. It tells the agent why personas are useful, but not what a persona is, how to use the parameters, or what the response contains, leaving a meaningful gap for confident invocation.

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 0%, and the description gives no explanation of either 'top' or 'query'. An agent cannot know whether 'top' is a count, limit, offset, or ranking threshold, nor what 'query' filters against.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Find personas' for use when filtering prompts, and notes an ordering trait (most common first). It is distinguishable from sibling tools by naming a distinct resource (personas vs prompts, packs, categories, tags), though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling.

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 phrase 'when filtering prompts' implies a clear use case, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives like search_prompts or list_tags. No when-not-to-use or exclusions are provided, leaving some inference to the agent.

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