list_master_spreads

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It correctly implies a read-only listing, but does not disclose potential behavioral traits such as response size, authentication needs, or performance implications. This is adequate for a simple listing, but additional context would improve transparency.

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 key action and resource. No wasted words; every part is necessary and serves its purpose.

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 simple listing tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. However, it does not describe the format of the returned data (e.g., names, IDs), which could help the agent use the output. Minor gap.

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?

There are no parameters (schema coverage 100%). The description adds no parameter information, but parameters don't exist, so the baseline is 4. It correctly handles the zero-parameter case.

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 'List all master spreads in the document' clearly states the action (list), resource (master spreads), and scope (in the document). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_spreads (regular spreads) and get_master_spread_info (specific master spread info).

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 when to use the tool (to retrieve all master spreads), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternative tools. Given the sibling context, an agent can infer, but the description itself lacks guidance.

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