element_definitions_list

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

The description confirms the tool is read-only, aligning with annotations, and adds context about mutation handling being deferred to another API. This goes beyond the annotations by explaining how mutations should be performed.

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 three concise sentences that front-load the core purpose and return structure, then immediately provide usage guidance. 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 the lack of an output schema, the description adequately describes the return fields but omits details about the 'site' parameter. This gap reduces completeness for a simple list tool.

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 description does not explain the 'site' parameter at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should clarify the parameter's meaning and format, but it fails to do so, leaving ambiguity.

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 it lists element definitions with specific fields (id, title, property_keys) and explicitly tells how to use the returned id for element_create, which distinguishes it from similar sibling tools like elements_list.

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 indicates this tool is read-only and directs mutations to voog_admin_api_call, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It could be more explicit about not using it for filtering or other operations, but the guidance is sufficient.

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