list_pages

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: it discloses pagination (50 per call, pass returned `next` as `cursor` with the same filters), that filters combine, and the non-obvious date-matching rule (a page matches when a cited source occurred in the range). It also scopes results to 'visible' pages, implying permission 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?

Purpose and sibling contrast are front-loaded, and every clause adds information, but the middle filter sentence is a dense run-on that packs many filters together. Still efficient overall with no filler.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Combined with the thorough coverage of filtering, sorting, and pagination, the description gives an agent everything needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it enumerates the allowed values for `type`, `entity_type`, and `sort`, explains `since`/`until` format and matching semantics, defines `links_to` (page path or entity title/alias), and describes `cursor` reuse. Every parameter is given meaning beyond the bare 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 a specific verb and resource ('List every visible page that matches') plus its scope ('exhaustive, 50 per call'), and explicitly contrasts with the sibling search_brain. An agent can distinguish it from search_brain without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete triggering language ('all', 'every', 'which', a period, everything connected to a page) and names the alternative it replaces (search_brain, which returns only similar pages). The condition selecting this tool over the sibling is explicit.

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