list_teams

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

Discloses that only team identity is returned (id, name, description, timestamps). Transparently documents API limitation where GET /teams/{id}/users 404s and embed=users is ignored, along with workarounds. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and succeeds.

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?

Description is efficient and front-loaded with core purpose and usage. Every sentence adds value despite length explaining limitations. Could be slightly tighter but well structured for the information density.

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 list tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, limitations, and workarounds comprehensively. No gaps remain for typical use cases.

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 coverage is 50% (only perPage has a description). The description adds no meaning for parameters beyond what schema already provides; it does not describe page or elaborate on perPage. With moderate coverage, description should compensate but does not.

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?

Clearly states the verb and resource: 'List all teams configured in the Capsule account.' Differentiates from siblings by specifying the data returned and its use as input for filter_* queries.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: as input for filter_* queries and reporting. Also details a major limitation (no team↔user membership via API) and provides two workarounds, guiding the agent on when not to rely solely on this tool.

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