list_meta_imports

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 only states 'List metadata import jobs', implying a read-only operation but offering no details about pagination, filtering, response shape, or any side effects. This is minimal and does not go beyond what the name already suggests.

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 that is front-loaded and not verbose. However, it is essentially a paraphrase of the tool name and adds little value, so while it is appropriately sized, the substance is lacking.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what metadata import jobs are, what the returned data looks like, or how the parameters affect the results. For a list tool with minimal context, this is not sufficient to fully guide an agent.

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 has 100% coverage for all three parameters (q, page, per_page) with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides, so it neither enhances nor detracts from the schema's meaning.

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 'List metadata import jobs' uses the specific verb 'List' and names the resource 'metadata import jobs', clearly stating the tool's purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_meta_import or list_tag_imports, so it doesn't fully distinguish itself.

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. There is no mention of differences from get_meta_import (single import) or list_tag_imports (tag imports), leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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