list_fields

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It implies a read operation but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, nor does it mention pagination behavior beyond a vague hint. No details on output structure or side effects.

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?

Single sentence with no extraneous words. Front-loaded with core purpose. Very concise while still conveying optional behavior.

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?

Despite having an output schema (unknown content), the description lacks scope, explanation of 'current working fields', and any filtering capabilities. For a listing tool, more context is expected.

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 description adds some meaning to the page_index parameter by noting optional pagination, but it does not clarify that page_index specifies which page or what values are valid. Since schema has no description, this is a minor improvement.

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 the action (list) and the resource (current working fields), and adds the optional page constraint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_field, remove_field, etc. However, 'current working fields' is somewhat vague.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives like prune_fields or render_preview. The description does not include context for using the optional page parameter or any prerequisites.

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