passgage_list_entrances

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions optional filtering and pagination, which is already present in the schema. It does not disclose response format, default ordering, authentication requirements, or any side effects, leaving the agent under-informed for a tool with no output schema.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core action and options. It is appropriately compact for a simple list tool, though it omits potentially useful context (e.g., response shape). Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description is minimal and does not explain what an 'entrance' is, what fields are returned, how pagination behaves (e.g., total count), or any filtering syntax nuances. This is insufficient for a tool with no structured output metadata.

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 100%; each parameter (page, filters, per_page) is described. The description itself adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, merely restating that filtering and pagination are optional. Therefore, it meets the baseline of 3 but does not exceed it.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('entrances'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like passgage_get_entrance. The phrase 'with optional filtering and pagination' adds scope and functional detail. This is a specific and clear purpose statement.

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 implies when to use this tool—when you need to list multiple entrances—by contrasting with the singular 'get_entrance'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The usage context is merely implied, not explicitly guided.

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