conduyt_list_smart_views

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, and it does well: it discloses the ordered, read-only nature of the result and explains the semantics of ambiguous fields (dialEnabled = dialing priority; sortPosition = rank). It omits pagination, result-size limits, and permission requirements for a listing tool, which keeps it just under a 5.

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 main action and ordering are front-loaded, and the field enumeration is dense but each named field earns its place because there is no output schema. The parenthetical field glossary runs long but remains readable.

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?

With no output schema, annotations, or parameters, the description is the only contract, and it successfully describes the returned object's shape including audience and dialing sub-structures. The main residual gap is that pagination or size limits on an account-wide listing are never mentioned.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the description doesn't waste space inventing parameter guidance.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the account's Smart Views') and immediately scopes the result: sidebar order, lead counts, audience, and Smart Dialing settings. This distinguishes it from neighboring tools such as get_smart_list and get_smart_dialing_order, which return narrower slices of the same domain.

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?

Gives two concrete use cases: answering 'what does the team dial first?' and reading the current state before changing a priority. It doesn't name an alternative tool (e.g. get_smart_dialing_order) to route against, but the intent conditions are clear.

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