list_kb_articles

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the heavy response payload, the memory limit issue, auto-clamping behavior, and the response wrapper dict with _clamped_range_limit and _warning. It also states the unchanged behavior for range_start <= 60, giving the agent a complete behavioral model.

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 well-structured, starting with the core purpose, then explaining the behavioral caveat, the clamp rule, and the warning wrapper. Each sentence contributes essential information with no fluff, and the length is justified by the complexity of the behavior.

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 tool has no output schema, but the description covers the return format (dict with _clamped_range_limit and _warning) when clamping occurs. It addresses potential memory failures, making the description complete for safe usage. No additional details are necessary for a simple listing tool with pagination.

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. It explains how range_start and range_limit interact (range_start > 60 combined with range_limit > 10 triggers clamping) and clarifies the clamping effect. While it doesn't define them as offset/limit, it gives meaningful context that helps the agent choose appropriate values.

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 states 'List GLPI knowledge base articles with pagination' with a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_kb_article (single article) and search_kb_articles (search).

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 clearly implies usage for listing with pagination, but does not explicitly compare to alternatives such as search_kb_articles or mention when not to use this tool. The pagination and memory caveats provide context but not direct usage guidance.

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