marketplace_get_access_lists

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It reveals that this is a read-only operation (via 'Get') and adds an important behavioral constraint ('tool owner only'), exceeding what the schema provides. It does not detail the return format or error conditions, but for a simple read, the added ownership context is significant.

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 a single, concise sentence that leads with the verb and packs essential information (what is retrieved, for whom, and the ownership restriction). 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?

For a simple read operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequately complete. It specifies the purpose and the key constraint but does not cover return format or error scenarios; however, these are less critical at this complexity level. The absence of explicit alternatives is a minor gap.

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 schema already covers the parameter fully ('Your tool ID') with 100% coverage, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description adds only the context that the tool is the subject of the lists, which is minimal additional value.

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 ('Get') and the specific resource ('allowlist and blocklist for a tool'), with a critical role constraint ('tool owner only'). This distinguishes it from sibling marketplace tools that modify access lists or perform other functions.

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 clear context by stating 'tool owner only', which implies when the tool is appropriate (if you own the tool), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives like the sibling marketplace_allowlist_user tool or any exclusions. Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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