list_views

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that vault content is not read (a side-effect/safety-relevant trait), but says nothing about permissions, pagination, ordering, or what happens on an empty result.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scoping constraint is attached directly to the action. 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?

For a zero-parameter read tool this is close to adequate, but with no output schema the description could say what a listed view looks like (names/identifiers) so an agent knows how to feed one into run_view. The meaning of 'declarative saved search view' is also left unexplained.

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 and the schema has 100% coverage with additionalProperties false, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. Baseline 4 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (declarative saved search views), and the qualifier 'without reading vault content' scopes it as a metadata-only operation. It is distinguishable from run_view, though it never names that sibling to make the boundary explicit.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'without reading vault content' suggests this is the cheap discovery step before run_view, but no when-to-use condition, prerequisite, or alternative is stated. An agent must infer the list-then-run workflow from the sibling names alone.

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