List tool app gallery entries

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) and authorization class ('board'), which is useful but not extensive. No contradictions 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?

The description is very short (two lines), but the first line simply repeats the title from annotations, making it redundant. The second line adds value with endpoint and auth class. It is concise but not optimally structured (wasted repetition).

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?

The description lacks information about the required 'companyId' parameter and what constitutes a valid value. Although an output schema exists, the agent has no context on pagination, ordering, or the response shape. The minimal description leaves gaps for this simple list tool.

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%, meaning the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description fails to compensate: it does not explain the 'companyId' parameter or the nested 'path' object. The agent receives no guidance on parameter meaning or format.

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 states 'List tool app gallery entries' with a specific verb and resource. The endpoint path reinforces this. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like pc_get_companies or pc_get_skills_catalog, though the resource name 'tool app gallery entries' is unique.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions is given. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and endpoint alone.

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