List records

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses filter operators, expand behavior, and the skipTotal performance trade-off, but does not mention the response envelope, authentication needs, or error behavior.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, with each following sentence adding concrete, non-redundant examples. It is compact without being terse.

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?

For a read tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers query mechanics well but omits the return shape and any guidance about when to prefer sibling listing tools. This leaves some ambiguity for an agent deciding how to handle the response.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds real value beyond the schema by showing exact filter expression syntax, operators, expand syntax, and the skipTotal optimization rationale.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List records of a collection') and names the key capabilities: pagination, filtering, sorting, and relation expansion. This clearly distinguishes it from single-record siblings like get_record or get_first_record.

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 practical usage tips (expand syntax, skipTotal for performance), which implies when the tool is useful. However, it never explicitly contrasts with alternatives like get_full_record_list or get_record, nor says when not to use this tool.

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