list_user_invites

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent. Description adds an enterprise restriction (returns 403 on non-Enterprise plans), which is valuable behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first lists purpose and output fields, second provides usage guidance and access restriction. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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 zero parameters and an output schema (with fields listed), the description fully covers what an agent needs to know: what it lists, what fields returned, when to use, and access restrictions.

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?

No parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. Baseline 4 applies; description adds no parameter details, which 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 the tool lists pending and sent invitations with specific fields. It distinguishes from the sibling 'list_all_users' by specifying when to use each.

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?

Explicitly states when to use this tool ('check invite state') and when to use the alternative ('list_all_users for users who already accepted'). Also mentions enterprise-gating.

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