list_views

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists views and explains the xml default behavior, but does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, what permissions are required, or any other behavioral traits beyond listing.

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 concise with one introductory sentence and two bullet points for parameters. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient for an AI agent.

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 no output schema, the description mentions that return fields include name and guid, which provides a basic understanding. However, it does not specify the full structure (e.g., list of objects) or how many results. Still, it is mostly complete for a simple listing 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so effectively: folder is described as a path under viewpoints with examples, and xml is described as an optional file path with a default behavior (master from env). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states that the tool lists views (name, guid) in a specified folder. The verb 'list' is implied and the resource 'views' is specified. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_folders, which list folders instead.

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 explains the parameters and default behavior (if xml not given, master from env is used), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. Usage context is implied but not fully guided.

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