List Pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the tool returns 'content previews, word counts, and contextual information,' which hints at read-only behavior, but doesn't clarify pagination details (implied by offset/count parameters), rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling. For a list operation with multiple parameters, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It avoids redundancy and wastes no words, though it could be slightly more structured by separating purpose from output details. Overall, it's appropriately concise for a list tool.

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?

Given the complexity (6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate. It states what the tool does but lacks details on usage context, behavioral traits, and output format. Without annotations or output schema, more guidance on return values and operational constraints would improve completeness.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 6 parameters. The description adds no specific parameter semantics beyond implying that results include 'content previews, word counts, and contextual information,' which relates to output rather than input. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding of parameters.

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 the tool's purpose: 'List pages with content previews, word counts, and contextual information.' It specifies the verb 'List' and resource 'pages,' and mentions the returned data attributes. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_page' (singular) or 'search_pages,' which could cause confusion.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_page' (singular), 'search_pages,' and 'get_chapters,' there's no indication of whether this is for bulk listing, filtered queries, or general browsing. This lack of context makes it hard for an agent to choose appropriately.

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