List Escalation Levels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint, so the description's only job is added context — and it supplies none. It does not state that results are scoped to a single escalation policy, whether pagination is required, or how many levels are typically returned.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no wasted words, so it is structurally clean. However, brevity here comes from under-specification rather than efficiency.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the description omits the parent-resource scoping, the pagination parameters, and any usage context. For a 4-parameter listing tool with 25% schema coverage, that leaves the agent guessing.

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 only 25%: escalation_policy_id is documented, but include, page_size and page_number are undocumented anywhere. The description does not compensate at all, saying nothing about parameters, valid values, or pagination semantics.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

No indication of when to use this versus list_escalation_policies, get_escalation_level, or list_escalation_levels_paths. The only hint is the implicit 'list' verb, and there is no mention of prerequisites such as needing an existing policy.

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