list_assets

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

Annotations already declare read-only and non-destructive behavior; the description adds the response shape and pagination mechanism, which is useful context beyond the 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?

Two sentences plus a return format line, with no redundancy or fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Provides core listing semantics and return shape, but omits explanations of filter parameters (only_archived, exclude_assets, exclude_collections) and pagination controls (cursor, page_size). No output schema exists to fill 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?

Schema has zero property descriptions, so the description must compensate. It explains workspace_id and types, but leaves 6 of 8 parameters undocumented (cursor, page_size, only_archived, exclude_assets, exclude_collections, hub_profile_id), which is insufficient for a 0% coverage schema.

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 it lists assets in a hub profile with cursor-based pagination, clearly distinguishing from single-get (get_asset) and search (search_assets) operations. The verb and resource are specific.

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?

Provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over search_assets or get_asset. Only hints at sourcing workspace_id via list_workspaces(), but no alternative comparisons or selection criteria.

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