list_records

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it's a list operation with optional filters, implying read-only behavior, but doesn't disclose critical details like pagination handling (implied by 'page' and 'perPage' parameters), rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions. For a tool with 5 parameters and no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('List records from a collection') and adds key functionality ('with optional filters'). There is no wasted verbiage, and it's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 annotations, no output schema, and 5 parameters with full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on usage context, behavioral traits, and output format. For a list operation with filtering and pagination, more guidance on results and limitations would improve completeness, but it's not entirely inadequate.

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%, so the schema fully documents all 5 parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'optional filters' (hinting at the 'filter' parameter) but doesn't provide additional context like filter syntax examples or default behaviors. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description doesn't significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('records from a collection'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_collection' or 'create_record' by focusing on listing records rather than single retrieval or creation. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list operations like 'list_collections' beyond the resource type.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'optional filters' but doesn't specify scenarios where filtering is needed or when to choose this over other tools like 'get_collection' for metadata or 'search' operations if available. No prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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