redirects_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds value by confirming 'Read-only' and listing the fields returned, establishing no hidden side effects.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence plus a 'Read-only' tag. Front-loaded with action and resource, no filler.

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 simple input (single required parameter) and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, inputs, and return fields. No gaps remain.

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 100% with a clear parameter description ('Site name from voog_list_sites'). The tool description does not add meaningful additional semantics beyond restating the context, so baseline score is appropriate.

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 all redirect rules on a Voog site and enumerates the returned fields (id, source, destination, redirect_type, active). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like redirect_add, redirect_delete, and redirect_update by explicitly stating it's read-only.

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?

While not explicit, the read-only nature and listing function imply usage for viewing existing rules. The sibling tools are clearly for modifications, so the context is sufficient without explicit when-not statements.

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