penpot_list_pages

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read operation (listing pages) and specifies output fields and ordering. However, it does not explicitly state non-destructiveness or side effects, though none are implied.

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?

A single sentence of 19 words, front-loaded with the key information ('List all pages') and additional details on return values and ordering. No redundant information.

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 simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, returned fields, and ordering. It could specify the ordering criteria (e.g., creation order) but is otherwise complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal meaning beyond the parameter name and type. It mentions 'in a Penpot file' but does not clarify how to obtain the fileId or expected format. The single parameter is simple, so the gap is acceptable but not fully compensated.

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 lists all pages in a Penpot file and returns each page's id and name in order. This specific verb-resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like penpot_create_page or penpot_delete_page.

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 implies usage for retrieving page listings but does not provide when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. No explicit context for selecting this tool over others is given.

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