List competitors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds default expand=full behavior and error types (unauthorized, rate_limited), providing valuable context beyond annotations.

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?

Well-structured with headings and bullet points. Every sentence adds value; no fluff. Slightly longer than minimal but justified by useful detail.

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 output schema exists, description doesn't need to explain return values. Covers error types, chaining, filtering, and default behavior completely for a list tool.

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%, so parameters are well-documented. Description adds meaning: defaults for expand, filtering semantics for active (tracked vs archived), and ids as comma-joined upstream. Adds value beyond schema definitions.

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?

Description clearly states it wraps GET /competitors and lists every competitor in the workspace, with scope defined. It distinguishes from siblings like get_competitor (single) and list_activities (activities).

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?

Provides clear when-to-use context with filtering options and chaining to other tools (get_competitor, list_activities). Could explicitly state not to use for single competitor retrieval, but sibling differentiation is implicit.

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