List an account's lists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description contributes the scoping detail that results are lists created by the account and that returned URIs are meant to be passed onward, which adds modest behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then immediately explains how to use the result with sibling tools. Every clause earns its place; there is zero filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description partially compensates by saying the result is a set of curated lists with URIs that can be passed to get_list_posts or get_list_members. Together with the rich parameter schema and strong annotations, an agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly, though a bit more detail on the response shape would make it fully complete.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters including actor, limit, cursor, and account. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond implying the actor is the account whose lists are being fetched, so the baseline score of 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 states a specific resource and action: curated lists an account has created. It also differentiates itself from sibling tools by explaining how the returned URIs are consumed by get_list_posts and get_list_members, so an agent knows exactly what this tool provides.

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 clearly frames when to use this tool: when you need to see the curated lists a given account has created. It names downstream tools and how the output feeds into them, providing useful routing context, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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