swebsy_list_sites

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the tool returns metadata only and orders results newest-first, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only (though 'metadata only' strongly implies it), whether it requires an active session/pairing, or what happens when there are no saved sites. The description adds some value but leaves the safety profile implicit.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core action ('List saved sites newest-first') and then packs the return fields into a compact list. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description is nearly complete: it specifies ordering, the metadata-only nature, and the exact fields returned. The only gaps are minor—no mention of empty-result behavior or session requirements—but these are not critical for an agent deciding whether to call this tool. The sibling list confirms it is one of many list tools, and the description gives enough to distinguish it.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no schema burden to compensate for. The description fully explains what the tool returns, which is the only semantic content an agent needs. With 0 params, the baseline is 4, and the description meets it by clearly defining the output scope.

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 a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('saved sites'), and a precise scope ('newest-first as metadata only'). It enumerates the exact fields returned (IDs, internal names, status, timestamps, template ID, page count, open state), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like swebsy_list_pages and swebsy_list_templates. The phrase 'metadata only' also clarifies it is a lightweight read operation, not a content fetch.

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 implies a read-only listing use case and the 'newest-first' ordering gives some context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as swebsy_list_pages or swebsy_list_templates. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., whether sites must be paired/created first) or exclusions. The context is clear enough for a simple list tool, but the guidance is not explicit.

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