list_questions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Read', implying no side effects, but lacks details on authentication, rate limits, or behavior when no questions exist. More is expected.

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, front-loaded sentence. It is appropriately concise for a tool with no parameters. However, it could include more context without losing 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?

Given no output schema and low complexity, the description is somewhat incomplete. It doesn't specify what 'questionary' means or what the return values are. Adequate but could be more helpful.

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 has no parameters and coverage is 100% (vacuously). Baseline for high coverage is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the empty schema, so score is at baseline.

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 'Read the current questionary' clearly indicates a read operation on a resource called 'questionary'. The verb 'Read' combined with the noun 'questionary' (presumably a set of questions) makes the purpose reasonably clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_question or delete_question which involve mutations.

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 mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. For example, it doesn't differentiate from list_answers or list_question_options.

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