List documents in a Mudbase collection

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

With no annotations at all, the description must disclose behavior itself. It conveys that the operation lists documents with pagination, sorting, and an optional filter, but it does not specify the result shape, whether sort/filter values are required, or error behavior. For a safe read-only listing this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 cover the operation's purpose and include an illustrative filter example. There is no duplicated schema detail or filler.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the definition leaves the result format and failure behavior unspecified; pagination/sorting are named but not detailed. The filter example helps, but an agent lacks full information about what the call returns or how errors surface.

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?

All six parameters are documented in the schema, and the description adds value by explaining the optional filter through a concrete JSON example and by naming pagination and sorting. It does not need to restate the parameter schema, so this addition is meaningful.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List documents in a Mudbase collection,' and it also states the available capabilities (pagination, sorting, optional filter). However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool search_documents, so the agent must infer when listing is the correct operation rather than searching.

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 tells the agent what the tool does but not when to choose it over alternatives like search_documents or get_document. There is no mention of use cases, limitations, or combinations with other collection tools.

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