List authors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the credit cost model ('5-15 credits by rows returned'), which the agent cannot derive from the schema or annotations. It does not describe pagination or result ordering 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?

Two tight fragments with no filler; the resource definition is front-loaded and the cost caveat follows immediately. Nothing is wasted, though the phrasing is compressed to the point of being slightly telegraphic.

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-only list tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers what is returned, how it is scoped, and its cost. Only minor gaps remain around pagination behavior and returned field structure, which are low-stakes here.

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% — sort, limit, and offset are all fully self-documented including the leading-dash flip convention and defaults. The description's mention of 'aggregate model, download and like totals' loosely maps to the sort keys but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 identifies the resource precisely ('Model publishers with aggregate model, download and like totals') and pins the endpoint (GET /authors), which is more informative than the bare 'List authors' title. It implicitly differentiates from the singular get_author sibling, though it never names that sibling or any other alternative.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus get_author or search_datasets/search_models. The agent can infer this is a bulk-listing tool, but no condition, exclusion, or prerequisite is stated.

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