list_additional_parties

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose pagination behavior, embed options, or response format, leaving significant behavioral 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?

Three tight sentences: purpose, conceptual clarification, and parameter guidance. No filler or repetition, front-loaded.

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 5-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers the core concept and one parameter well but omits pagination, embed usage, and return values. It is minimally complete but leaves gaps.

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 description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that 'kases' is Capsule's term for projects. With 60% schema coverage, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 secondary party links on an opportunity or project, uses specific verbs ('list secondary party links'), and distinguishes from siblings like 'add_additional_party' and 'remove_additional_party'.

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 explains the concept of 'main' vs. 'additional' parties and advises on setting the 'entity' parameter to 'opportunities' or 'kases'. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear.

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