List Assets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds only that it is paginated, which is already captured by the input schema parameters. No additional behavioral context such as return format, asset types, or access considerations is disclosed.

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 four words long, front-loaded, and free of filler. It communicates the core action and pagination in a single concise phrase, earning high marks for conciseness, though it sacrifices informative detail.

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?

This is a simple two-parameter list tool with no output schema, but the description still feels incomplete. It does not define what 'assets' refers to, whether results are scoped to the user or organization, or how this tool differs from similar sibling tools like lyzr_list_user_assets. The agent would need to guess from context.

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% for both parameters (page and limit), each with clear descriptions including defaults and limits. The tool description does not add semantic value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List assets, paginated' clearly indicates a read-only listing operation on 'assets' with pagination. However, it does not specify whether these are all assets or a filtered subset, and it does not distinguish itself from similar sibling tools like lyzr_list_user_assets or lyzr_search_user_assets.

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 versus alternatives. The description gives no context about preferred use cases, exclusions, or relationships to other listing/search tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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