list_documents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the critical pagination requirement, which goes beyond a simple 'list' statement. However, it does not mention side effects, return format, or permissions, though the read-only nature is implicit.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by a precise pagination warning. No filler or redundant text.

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 tool's simplicity and full schema parameter coverage, the description is mostly complete. It supplements the schema with a key pagination warning and hints at the response structure (total_pages). Lack of an explicit output schema is mitigated by the page parameter description, though return fields are not fully specified.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptive parameter docs. The description adds the pagination context which partially overlaps with the page parameter description, but does not add new meaning for other parameters. Baseline 3 applies due to full schema coverage.

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 'List documents (content instances) in the organisation', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_document, which fetches a single document, and other list tools.

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 advises paginating via total_pages before concluding a document doesn't exist, providing important usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_document or list_content_types, leaving the selection partially implied.

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