list_records

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

No annotations provided, but the description reveals the return structure (dict with success, message, records, record_count) and implies read-only behavior via 'Liste'. It lacks explicit statements about side effects or error handling, but the return structure adds transparency.

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 well-organized with sections: introductory sentence, Prérequis, Flux de travail typique, Voir aussi, Args, Returns. It is concise and every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (list records with optional sort/limit) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers prerequisites, workflow, parameters, return format, and alternatives. It is fully self-contained for an agent to use correctly.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains all four parameters: doc_id, table_id, sort (with format), and limit (with purpose). This adds meaning well beyond the schema types and defaults.

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 'Liste' and the resource 'enregistrements dans une table Grist' with optional sorting and limiting. It distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing alternatives like filter_sql_query and add_grist_records.

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 provides prerequisites (list_tables), a typical workflow (list_tables -> list_columns -> list_records), and alternatives (filter_sql_query for advanced filtering, add_grist_records for adding). This gives clear guidance on when to use this tool versus others.

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