list_destinations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses pagination behavior ('read has_more and total, pass page=1, page=2...'), which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or mention any other behavioral aspects like permissions or rate limits.

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 three sentences: the first states the purpose, the second gives a use case, and the third explains pagination. Every sentence adds value, with no waste or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (2 optional parameters) and an output schema exists, so the description doesn't need to describe return values. It covers purpose, use case, and pagination adequately. While it doesn't mention error handling, that is less critical for a straightforward list operation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining the pagination pattern. It clarifies that 'page' is used to continue through pages and mentions reading 'has_more' and 'total', giving meaning beyond the bare integer parameters in the schema.

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 tool's function with a specific verb and resource: 'List destinations'. It further defines what destinations are ('vector stores or warehouses that ingestion writes into'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_sources and list_knowledge_bases.

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 gives an explicit use case: 'Needed to pick a destination_id for import_source_metadata.' This tells the agent when to use the tool. It also provides pagination instructions, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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