karea_list_questions

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

No annotations provided. The description lacks details about read-only nature, pagination, sorting, or limits. The simplification to 'open' questions is misleading given the status parameter allows filtering.

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 a single sentence with no waste. However, it is too brief and misses important qualifiers about the status parameter.

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?

No output schema, and the description does not indicate what the tool returns (e.g., list of questions with fields). Context from siblings suggests other list tools often include output details.

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 100% with clear descriptions, so baseline is 3. However, the description's focus on 'open' contradicts the default 'all' in the schema, adding confusion rather than clarity.

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 specifies the verb 'List', resource 'questions', and context 'open' and 'in a project'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like karea_create_question. However, the description implies only open questions, while the default status is 'all', causing slight inconsistency.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like karea_list_tasks or karea_list_notes. No mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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