list_my_lists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates a read-only listing operation and ownership scope, but does not mention pagination, ordering, whether both list types are merged, or any other runtime behavior. The output schema exists, which helps, but the description itself adds little beyond the basic action.

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 a single clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and scope without redundancy.

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?

For a simple zero-parameter read operation with an output schema, the description covers the essential context: whose lists and which lists. It could mention that it returns only non-shared, personally-owned lists more explicitly, but the current scope statement is largely sufficient given the tool's low complexity.

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 tool has zero parameters and full schema coverage, so there are no parameter meanings to explain. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description appropriately says nothing about nonexistent parameters.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and a precise resource ('the authenticated owner's shopping and wish lists'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_my_invites, list_shared_with_me, and get_list.

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 conveys that this is for the authenticated owner's own lists, which implies the right context for use. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives such as list_shared_with_me or get_list.

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