clickup_attachment_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool extracts from the Get Task response (no dedicated endpoint) and lists the fields returned. However, it does not mention authorization requirements, rate limits, or confirm read-only behavior (though implied). This is adequate but leaves gaps.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by supplementary implementation details and a sibling reference. No extraneous words; every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return format (attachments array with specific fields) and the technical workaround. It adequately covers usage, parameters, and return shape for a simple list tool, though could mention pagination or limits if any exist.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds context: task_id source ('Obtain from clickup_task_list') and team_id optionality ('default workspace from config'). This adds meaningful value beyond the schema.

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 uses a clear verb+resource ('List files attached to a ClickUp task') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like clickup_attachment_upload by noting the upload alternative. It also explains the implementation detail (extracts from Get Task response), adding purpose clarity.

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 explicitly directs to use clickup_attachment_upload for adding files, providing clear context for when to choose an alternative. However, it does not state when not to use this tool or any exclusions, which would make it a 5.

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