list_teams

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

Annotations already indicate read-only safety, but the description adds crucial behavioral limits: it returns only team identity fields, and Capsule's v2 API exposes no team-to-user membership. The warning not to test membership via real writes is valuable operational context beyond 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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the later limitation details are dense but meaningful. Some API endpoint specifics and the exact web UI path could be trimmed, but they support the guardrail.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully names the returned fields and the missing membership capability. It is nearly complete, though it omits pagination behavior for a list-all 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?

Only perPage is documented in the schema; page has no description. The description adds no explanation of pagination parameters or how to traverse results, so it does not compensate for the partial schema coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List all teams") and scopes it to teams configured in the Capsule account. It also clarifies that the result is useful as input for filter_* queries and reporting, which distinguishes it from generic user or party listing tools.

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 describes when to use it: as input for team-scoped filter_* queries and reporting. It also gives a clear when-not/alternative for team membership checks, directing the user to Capsule's web UI and warning against using writes as probes.

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