List portal blocks

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint (safe) and openWorldHint (data may change). The description adds filtering behaviors but doesn't detail pagination, ordering, or response structure. It is consistent with annotations, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded ('List blocks on the portal'), and optional behaviors are succinctly appended.

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 tool with two optional parameters and robust annotations, the description covers core functionality. It does not mention output format, but no output schema exists, so it is adequate.

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 100% and the description restates parameter purposes ('Filter to these block UUIDs' and 'Return only id+name pairs') without adding new meaning beyond the schema descriptions. Baseline 3.

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 'List blocks on the portal' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_block' (single block) and mutation tools (create, delete, update) by focusing on listing with optional filters.

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 usage: when you need to list blocks, optionally filtered by IDs or return only names. It does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives like 'list_datasources', but the context is clear for a list operation.

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