List an account's lists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. It adds useful behavioral context by revealing that the output contains URIs usable as identifiers for the get_list_posts and get_list_members tools, which is not derivable from the annotations alone.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, and the second sentence is a focused, pragmatic note on how to use the results. No wasted words or irrelevant detail.

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 read-only listing tool, the description is complete enough: it defines the contained resource and tells the agent how to chain the result into sibling tools. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the URI-pointer hint, though a short note on the list object shape would have made it fully self-contained.

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 input schema already provides thorough descriptions for all four parameters, yielding full 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, which is acceptable at the baseline of 3 since the agent can rely on the schema alone.

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 that the tool lists curated lists an account has created, a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from related get_list_posts and get_list_members by describing those as separate follow-up operations on the returned URI, avoiding confusion without even needing to open the schemas.

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?

It directly tells the agent what to do after obtaining lists—pass a returned URI to get_list_posts or get_list_members. It does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool vs alternatives, but the workflow guidance is clear and effectively frames the tool as the entry point to list-related operations.

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