list_opt_out_lists

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'List', which implies a read operation, but it does not mention pagination, ordering, or any side effects. For a zero-parameter list tool, this is minimal disclosure and does not go beyond what the name already suggests.

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 with no redundancy. It states exactly what the tool does in as few words as possible, which is ideal for conciseness and front-loading.

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, parameterless list operation with no output schema, the description is functionally sufficient but sparse. It does not describe the return format, any default behavior, or potential limitations. While an agent can call it without parameters, the lack of any return description or usage hints makes it only minimally 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?

There are no parameters, so the schema covers everything (100% coverage). The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds nothing that conflicts or needs elaboration. It is a trivial case where no parameter semantics are required.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'SMS opt-out / suppression lists', distinguishing it from sibling list_opt_out_entries which lists individual entries rather than the lists themselves. This is specific and unambiguous.

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 like create_opt_out_list or list_opt_out_entries. No exclusions, prerequisites, or contextual triggers are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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