clients_list

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

The description discloses the important behavioral trait of automatic pagination, which helps the agent understand the tool's behavior. However, with no annotations, it does not cover other aspects like rate limits or auth requirements, leaving some gaps.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no waste. Every word adds value, stating the action and a key behavioral trait (pagination).

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 5 well-described parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for a list operation. It could mention return format or errors, but the schema and purpose cover the essentials.

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 has 100% description coverage for all parameters, so the schema already provides clear meaning. The description adds minimal extra value beyond mentioning pagination, which relates to pageToken and maxPages. Baseline 3 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 all GTM clients in a workspace and distinguishes from siblings like clients_get (single client) and clients_create (create). It also mentions automatic pagination, which adds specificity.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool (list all clients) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. Among siblings, the purpose is evident.

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