list_reflections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds valuable behavioral details: 'since' is ISO 8601 cutoff, 'tags' is set intersection. No contradiction with 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, efficient. However, the leading 'v3.1.0 M8' is unnecessary metadata that could be removed for better conciseness.

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?

Provides filtering semantics but lacks information about output format, pagination, or how limit interacts. With no output schema, description should clarify what is returned. Sibling context suggests alternatives exist, but no comparison given.

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%. Description explains 'since' and 'tags' meaningfully, but omits explanation of 'limit' parameter, which has a default but no semantics provided.

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?

Clearly states it's a 'filtered reflection list' with specific filtering options. However, the version prefix 'v3.1.0 M8' adds noise without contributing to purpose clarity. Sibling distinction is implicit (filtered vs possibly unfiltered get_reflections) but not explicit.

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 tool versus alternatives like get_reflections, list_tags, or reflect. The description only explains parameters, not usage context.

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