list_my_submissions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds the scope constraint (only the authenticated client's submissions) but says nothing about result limits, ordering, or pagination for what could be an unbounded list — a meaningful gap for a list operation.

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 first sentence is front-loaded and states the purpose in one line; the Returns block is compact. The Returns block is largely redundant given that an output schema exists, which slightly dilutes the value of the second paragraph, but nothing is padded or meandering.

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?

With an output schema present, the description is not obligated to enumerate return fields, and its scope statement ('made by the authenticated API client') covers the key ambiguity. It stops short of 5 because nothing addresses volume, ordering, or truncation behavior for an unfiltered list.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The description correctly avoids inventing filter semantics, and the absence of any filter parameters is consistent with the 'list all' phrasing.

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 states a specific verb+resource (list submissions) and scopes it to the authenticated API client, which is genuinely clarifying. However, it never contrasts itself with the near-identical sibling list_my_forms or with the submission-scoped get_submission / delete_submissions tools, so an agent must infer the boundary from names alone.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as get_submission for a single record or list_my_forms for forms. The only usage signal is the implicit 'my' scope in the name, which the description repeats rather than extends.

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