list_documents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only reveals pagination; it does not state read-only status, default sort order, error behavior on missing kb, or whether results are limited to metadata. Minimal behavioral context is provided.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the verb 'browse'. It is appropriately short for a list operation, though it sacrifices some informational depth.

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 4 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and no annotations, this description is too sparse to be complete. The output schema covers return values, but parameter meanings, usage context, and behavioral specifics are largely absent. An agent would need to infer too much.

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 must compensate for parameter meanings. It clarifies that kb is a knowledge base and hints at pagination, but provides no detail on 'sort', 'page', or 'page_size' semantics beyond what the schema's titles already show.

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 a specific verb ('browse') and resource ('documents in a kb'), with pagination noted. It is distinguished from siblings like get_document or search_documents by the word 'browse', though it doesn't specify whether it returns metadata or full content.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The word 'browse' implies a listing use case, but there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or comparisons to search_documents or get_document.

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