fcrm list sequences

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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful capability gating ('Requires FluentCampaign Pro' and the fcrm_read_emails/fcrm_manage_emails requirement), which is useful beyond annotations. However, it doesn't explain pagination behavior, default ordering, or the stats payload shape.

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 core sentence is tight and front-loaded. However, the capability/licensing block is dense boilerplate with bureaucratic phrasing ('Enforced by SequencePolicy::verifyRequest(), the policy default for this route group') that adds bulk without clarifying agent behavior.

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 paginated list tool with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description covers purpose, optional stats, and the Pro requirement. It lacks pagination guidance and return-shape hints, but no output schema is declared, so some of that gap is acceptable.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema. The description only restates the 'with=stats' option, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Retrieve a paginated list of email sequences.' It distinguishes itself from siblings like fcrm_list_campaigns and fcrm_list_automations by naming 'email sequences'. No explicit sibling contrast, so not a 5.

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 states an optional 'with=stats' flag but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus fcrm_list_campaigns, fcrm_automation_report, or fcrm_dashboard_stats. No when-not or alternative routing.

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