list_goals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes the useful fact that goals are custom-event based, named, and ID-bearing (implying it is a discovery/ID-resolution step), but says nothing about scope, filtering, or whether the list is paginated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the resource and the payload (names and IDs) come first.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and a zero-parameter list tool needs little else. The only missing piece is how this list relates to goal_report, which would help an agent route correctly.

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 per the rubric the baseline is 4 and there is no schema detail the description could usefully add.

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 (Discover) and resource (named custom-event conversion goals) plus what is returned (their IDs), so the agent knows exactly what this tool yields. It does not differentiate itself from the sibling goal_report or explain the relationship to it, which keeps it at a 4 rather than 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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus goal_report or the other reporting siblings, and no stated prerequisites. 'Discover' implies lookup-before-use, but that inference is left entirely to the agent.

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