list_metaobjects

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

Describes return fields (name, handle, GID, status for publishable types) and cursor pagination with `after` parameter. No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden; it adequately covers read-only behavior and pagination, though could explicitly state non-destructiveness.

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?

Four concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant information. Every sentence adds necessary context.

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 sufficiently explains return fields and pagination. It references sibling tools appropriately, making it complete for a 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?

All three parameters are described in schema (100% coverage). Description adds value by explaining the meaning of `type` (from list_metaobject_definitions) and cursor usage for `after`, beyond schema descriptions.

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 explicitly states the tool lists instances of a single metaobject type, with concrete examples ('lookbook', 'product_feature'). It differentiates from siblings like get_metaobject (individual) and list_metaobject_definitions (type list).

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 context: use for listing instances of a type, obtain type handle from list_metaobject_definitions, and follow up with get_metaobject for full details. Implicitly advises when to use alternatives.

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