list_common_infos

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

No annotations provided; description is minimal. Does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, pagination behavior, rate limits, or any side effects. The limit parameter hints at pagination but no details are given.

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?

Description is concise (one sentence) but lacks structure. It does not include any supplementary information, but it is not overly verbose.

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 tool with one parameter, the description is barely adequate. It does not explain what 'common info' refers to, nor does it provide context on output format or typical usage.

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 coverage is 100% (only one parameter 'limit' with description). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which already specifies the default and max. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 '共通情報一覧を取得する' (Get common information list) clearly states the action (get list) and resource (common information). However, it does not differentiate from siblings like list_friends or list_tags, which are similarly named.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are sibling tools like list_common_info_folders and update_common_info, but the description provides no context for selection.

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