run_saved_filter

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds valuable behavioral context: pagination, pre-configured sort from the web UI, and that it returns results. No contradictions. A small gap is not mentioning output format, but that is secondary.

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 concise (three sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, sibling differentiation, usage scenario. No unnecessary words.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and annotations present, the description is fairly complete. It explains the key behavioral trait (sort support) and usage pattern. It could mention the return format or pagination defaults, but the schema covers pagination. The description provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 60%, and the description does not add much detail beyond the schema. It mentions 'by id' and 'paginated' but does not explain individual parameters like page, perPage, or embed in depth. The description adds some context (linking to list_saved_filters for id) but is not comprehensive.

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 'Run a saved filter by id and return its results, paginated.' It specifies the action and resource, and immediately distinguishes from sibling tools (filter_parties, filter_opportunities, filter_projects) by highlighting sort support, which is a key differentiator.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool: for sorted results when a saved filter exists, and when not to use it (use ad-hoc filter tools instead). It also provides a prerequisite step: 'use list_saved_filters first to find one.' This is comprehensive guidance.

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