haops_list_doc_sections

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

The description indicates a read-only, non-destructive operation by stating it returns data. However, it does not disclose pagination, permissions, or rate limits. For a listing tool, this is mostly transparent but could include more behavioral details.

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 that is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word contributes purpose, making it highly concise and efficient.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description adequately conveys what the tool does and what it returns. However, it does not specify filtering or sorting capabilities, which are common in listing tools.

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?

Both parameters are already described in the input schema with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the action (list), the resource (sections in a documentation artifact), and the output (hierarchy with titles, slugs, order). This readily distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_doc_section or get_doc_section.

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 usage for reading sections but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., haops_get_doc_section for a single section). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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