list_tabs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses return values (tab IDs, titles, nesting level, index), the synthetic '_body' tab for older documents, and the fact that every tool requires an explicit tab_id. It doesn't explicitly state read-only status, but 'List' strongly implies it, so this is solid but not perfect.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the function, explaining when and why to use it, and covering an edge case. No filler or redundancy; the critical 'use this first' guidance is front-loaded.

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 low complexity (one parameter) and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: the prerequisite role, the return fields, and the special legacy behavior. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this tool correctly.

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 only parameter doc_id has 0% schema description coverage and the description never explicitly explains it. However, the phrase 'a Google Doc' combined with the parameter name makes its meaning clear. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, so this is adequate but not compensated.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the tabs in a Google Doc.' It further distinguishes itself from siblings by stating it is a required first step before read_document or find_sections, making the purpose and scope unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly instructs when to use the tool: 'Use this tool first when you need to read or edit a document but do not yet know its tab structure.' It also explains the prerequisite relationship with read_document and find_sections and covers the legacy-document case, leaving little to inference.

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