karea_list_questions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses the read-only nature, default status, ordering, and available filters. This provides good behavioral context, though missing info on pagination or rate limits.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no unnecessary words. 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?

The description lacks explanation of output fields or return value structure, which is important since no output schema exists. It covers ordering and filters, but for a list tool, more detail on returned data is needed for complete context.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about status filter options ('open, answered, cancelled, all') and default behavior. However, it contradicts the schema's default for status (description says 'open', schema says 'all'), which reduces reliability.

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 specifies the verb 'list', the resource 'questions', the scope 'in a project', and ordering 'newest first'. It also mentions default status and filters, distinguishing it from sibling tools like karea_create_question and karea_answer_question.

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 explains the default status and how to pass other statuses ('open, answered, cancelled, all'). It also states the tool is read-only. However, it does not compare to other list tools like karea_list_tasks, but given the specific resource, usage is clear.

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