getAllSpecs

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as pagination behavior (implied by cursor parameter) or rate limits. Since annotations handle core traits, a baseline 3 is appropriate for minimal added value.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose ('Gets all API specifications') and specifies the scope ('in a workspace'), making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (list operation with pagination), annotations cover safety, but no output schema exists to describe return values. The description lacks details on result format or error handling, leaving gaps for the agent. It's minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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%, with clear documentation for workspaceId, cursor, and limit parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as explaining workspace context or pagination flow. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 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 the verb ('Gets') and resource ('all API specifications in a workspace'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'getSpec' (single spec) or 'getSpecFiles' (files rather than specifications), which would require a 5.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'getSpec' (single spec), 'getSpecFiles' (files), or 'getCollections' (collections), the agent lacks explicit direction on selecting this tool for retrieving all specifications versus other list operations.

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