Teams: List all teams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a genuine prerequisite (User API key via api-access-token header) and a note on Persian/Arabic-Indic digit handling, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, or ordering for a bulk list operation.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by endpoint and auth details. The trailing Persian/Arabic-Indic digit boilerplate is generic filler that does not help an agent call this particular tool.

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 one-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers what is retrieved, the scope, the endpoint, and the auth requirement. Return shape and pagination behavior are unstated, though the 'all teams' phrasing implies no pagination.

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 100% for the single account_id parameter, so the schema already carries the semantics. The description only echoes account scope via the URL template and adds no format or constraint details beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb and resource ('List all teams available in the current account') and scopes it to the account, which cleanly separates it from siblings like gapify_get_team, gapify_create_team, and gapify_list_team_agents. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 'current account' scope and the included endpoint/auth line imply when this tool applies, but there is no explicit statement of when to use it versus gapify_get_team or other team endpoints, and no exclusions. Guidance is inferable rather than stated.

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