list_goals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action (list) without disclosing behavioral traits such as readOnly vs destructive, authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or response format. For a simple list tool, minimal transparency is provided.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Each sentence adds value without redundancy. Efficient and clear.

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 (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the purpose and parameter. However, it lacks information about return format, pagination, limits, or any error conditions, leaving some completeness gaps.

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 has 100% coverage (counter_id described clearly). The description adds context by explaining what goals represent ('conversions like page visits, button clicks, or multi-step funnels'), which aids understanding beyond the schema's basic parameter description.

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?

Description states 'List all goals configured for a Yandex.Metrica counter.' This clearly identifies the verb (list), resource (goals), and scope (for a counter), distinguishing it from siblings like list_counters (counters) and create_goal (goal creation).

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?

Description implies usage when an agent needs to retrieve goals for a counter, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_goal, delete_goal, or list_counters. No guidance on prerequisites or when not to use.

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