List VWO campaign sections

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and list dynamism. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., permissions, rate limits, or error handling). It adequately complements annotations without contradiction.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short, front-loaded sentences that directly state the action and purpose, with no unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 good annotations and schema coverage, the description lacks context about output format, pagination behavior (limit/offset), and what 'sections' are. For a tool with no output schema, more detail would improve completeness. Current is adequate but minimal.

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%; all five parameters have detailed descriptions in the input schema. The tool description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond what is already documented, so a 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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'sections configured on a VWO campaign', and provides the specific purpose 'discover section ids', distinguishing it from sibling tools like vwo_list_campaigns or vwo_list_campaign_goals.

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 gives a clear usage hint ('Use this to discover section ids'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or alternatives like vwo_get_campaign_section for a single section. The context is clear but lacks exclusions.

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