conduyt_list_booking_pages

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the read-only nature via GET, the required scope, and the shape of returned records, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, ordering, or what an empty account returns.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with verb+resource, with the endpoint and field list compactly parenthesized and the scope requirement trailing. Nothing is wasted.

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 simple read-only list with one optional boolean and no output schema, the definition covers purpose, auth scope, and expected fields. Only pagination/ordering behavior is missing, which is a minor gap.

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% and the single optional parameter activeOnly is fully documented there ('only pages accepting bookings'). The description adds no filter syntax or default behavior beyond it, so baseline 3 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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('List the account's booking pages'), cites the underlying endpoint, and enumerates returned fields (slug, title, host, duration, active, video option). It is distinguishable from conduyt_get_booking_page/conduyt_create_booking_page by the 'List' verb, but never explicitly contrasts with them.

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?

Provides one concrete prerequisite ('Requires calendar:view'), which is real usage guidance. There is no statement about when to use this versus conduyt_get_booking_page for a single page or other calendar tools, so selection still requires inference.

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