List custom field values

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds that it returns a list and specifies the API endpoint, but does not disclose pagination behavior or other operational details beyond what annotations cover.

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 concise, two sentences long, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Including the API endpoint is useful and not verbose. No wasted words.

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 list tool with well-documented parameters and strong annotations, the description is sufficient. It states the scope and return type, and the API endpoint is a nice reference. Lack of output schema is offset by the clear 'Returns a list' statement and the fact that the schema covers inputs thoroughly.

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%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any extra meaning about parameter semantics, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate given the schema's thoroughness.

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 custom field values' and specifies the scope: 'for the organization, groups, or devices.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like listCustomFields (which lists field definitions) by focusing on values, and the API endpoint adds precision.

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 context is implied by mentioning the scope (org/groups/devices) and returning values, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternative tools like listCustomFields or updateCustomFieldValue. No exclusions or alternative names are given.

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