list_shares

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'List all shares.' It does not mention pagination behavior, whether this returns only top-level shares or all nested entries, or any other side effects or limitations.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, which is good, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. It earns a pass on conciseness but not on informativeness.

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 operation with optional pagination parameters and no output schema, the description is too thin to be complete. It does not explain pagination, the type of shares returned, or how this differs from the many share-related sibling tools.

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?

Both parameters have zero schema description coverage, and the description adds no meaning to 'page' or 'per_page.' The schema only provides types and defaults, so the agent must guess at their purpose and interaction.

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 verb 'list' and the resource 'shares,' so the basic action is understandable. However, it does not distinguish which kind of shares are meant, and the sibling list includes get_asset_shares and get_collection_shares, so the scope is ambiguous.

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?

No when-to-use guidance is provided. There is no mention of when to choose this tool over get_share, get_asset_shares, get_collection_shares, or list_share_users, making it hard for an agent to route correctly.

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