List Status Pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no mention of pagination behavior, default ordering, whether filtering is server-side, or result volume limits — notable gaps for a 19-filter listing endpoint.

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?

Three words with zero waste, but the problem is under-specification, not verbosity. There is no front-loaded scope, no alternative routing, nothing to prioritize because nothing is said.

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?

A tool with 19 optional parameters, no schema descriptions, and no parameter guidance in the description is severely under-documented. The output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but that is the only burden relieved.

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 0% and the description says nothing about any of the 19 parameters. The agent is left to guess the semantics of sort, include, page_size, page_number, and the eleven filter_* variants purely from their names, with no documented syntax, operators, or interaction rules.

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 guidance on when to use this versus get_status_page, list_status_page_templates, or the many other list_* siblings in the toolset. The agent must infer that this is the enumeration counterpart to the single-resource getter.

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