List design checklists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the bar is lower. The description adds that it returns summaries (not full checklists) and supports filtering, but does not disclose ordering, pagination behavior, or response format. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no redundant wording. The core action ('Browse checklist summaries') is stated first, and the second sentence efficiently covers filters and the sibling tool alternative.

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 list operation with strong annotations and a schema defining pagination, the description covers return type (summaries), optional filters, and when to use search_checklists. It omits explicit pagination wording, but defaults are in the schema and it is a standard pattern.

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 coverage is 50% (query and category have descriptions). The description repeats these and adds 'exact text phrase' to clarify query semantics, but does not explain limit/offset, which remain self-explanatory pagination fields. Moderate compensation for the missing schema descriptions.

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 tool browses checklist summaries and supports optional filtering by category and phrase. It explicitly differentiates this tool from search_checklists, which is for relevance-ranked discovery, making the purpose specific and distinct from siblings.

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 users to use search_checklists for relevance-ranked discovery, providing a clear alternative for a different use case. It also implies this tool is for structured browsing/filtering, giving clear context for when to choose it.

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