List content

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds the key default behavior that both published and unpublished items are returned unless filtered, which is not an obvious consequence of the schema alone. It does not mention pagination or other response traits, but for a simple list tool the stated behavior is sufficient.

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, front-loaded sentence covers purpose and key behavioral nuance without filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 straightforward listing tool with a small schema, the description plus schema provides enough to call it correctly: table is required, limit has defaults and bounds, and published_only's effect is stated. The lack of an output schema means return-structure details are not provided, but this is not a critical gap for correct invocation.

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 covers only table (33% coverage). The description helps by enumerating the content categories matching the table enum and by indicating the filtering effect for published_only, but it does not explain the limit parameter or explicitly map 'unless filtered' to published_only.

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 states a specific verb ('List') with a concrete resource scope ('blog posts, case studies, or resources'), which clearly differentiates this tool from sibling listing tools like list_job_postings and list_consultation_requests.

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?

Usage context is implied by naming the three content types, but the description never explicitly says when to choose this tool over sibling list tools or any exclusions. No alternative tools are named.

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