list_documents

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it discloses that per-document OCR content is stripped by default, and that notes and custom_fields values are always stripped. This is crucial for understanding what results contain, and annotations only provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, etc.

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 concise (three paragraphs) and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, second explains default stripping, third clarifies immutable stripping. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given 9 parameters with 0% schema description and an output schema, the description explains critical quirks (stripping behavior) but does not explain the effect of filters or the pagination beyond 'returns one page'. The output schema exists, so return structure is covered, but overall completeness is average.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It only explains include_content in detail and mentions stripping behavior for notes and custom_fields. Other parameters (tags, ordering, custom_field, storage_path, correspondent, document_type, page, page_size) are not described at all. This is insufficient for a tool with 9 parameters.

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 'List documents with optional filters. Returns one page.' It specifies the action (list), resource (documents), and distinguishes from siblings like get_document (single document) and search_documents (likely full-text search).

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 guidance on when to use include_content and notes that for full text of notes and custom fields, callers should use get_document or get_document_notes. It gives clear context for stripping behavior, but does not explicitly compare to search_documents or other listing tools, leaving some ambiguity.

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