List SharePoint Lists

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context by noting the required delegated permission and clarifying that document-library lists are included. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or describe what the returned data contains, so transparency is adequate but incomplete.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a permission note and a Chinese intent list. The Chinese intent phrases are somewhat repetitive but serve a localization purpose, so the structure is efficient with only minor redundancy.

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 list operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, the required permission, and the inclusion of document-library lists. It does not mention pagination or return formatting, but these are partially covered by the schema's 'top' parameter, and the operation is straightforward enough that the description feels complete for most use cases.

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 input schema already provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for both 'siteId' and 'top'. The description adds no additional parameter-specific semantics beyond reinforcing the site scope, so it does not exceed the baseline of 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 a specific action ('List') on a specific resource ('SharePoint lists and document-library lists') with a scope ('in a site'), and it distinguishes this from sibling tools such as sharepoint_list_list_items or sharepoint_list_drives by explicitly covering both regular lists and document-library lists.

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 when to use the tool (when you need to see lists in a site) and includes a permission prerequisite, but it does not explicitly compare with alternative tools like sharepoint_list_drives or sharepoint_list_list_items, nor does it mention exclusions. This makes usage guidance only implicit.

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