List saved views

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful domain context about where saved views come from, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as pagination or response 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?

Two sentences, both purposeful: the first defines the resource, the second explains why and when to use it. There is no filler or redundant repetition of the tool name or schema.

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, parameter-light listing tool, the description plus rich annotations and 100% schema coverage gives an agent enough to call it correctly. The only minor gap is no explicit statement of what the response contains, but the tool name and title already indicate a list of saved views.

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 all five parameters are already documented. The description adds the general notion that saved views have filters and names, which lightly reinforces name__icontains, but it does not meaningfully extend the schema's parameter documentation.

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 identifies saved views as user-built filter presets and describes the tool as a way to read them, which conveys the listing action even though it doesn't literally say 'list.' It distinguishes this from inventing new filters, but does not explicitly contrast it with the sibling get_saved_view tool.

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 gives concrete guidance: check saved views before inventing your own filters, positioning this as the default way to discover the user's organizational patterns. It does not mention specific sibling alternatives like get_saved_view, but the 'before inventing your own filters' condition is a clear usage cue.

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