List pages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explicitly states 'Read-only; doesn't consume credits,' which is valuable behavioral and cost information beyond the schema. It does not mention pagination behavior or response format, but the core transparency about side effects is present.

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, front-loaded sentence: 'List the project's pages (slug, title, type, is_homepage, is_active). Read-only; doesn't consume credits.' Every word adds value; no fluff.

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?

This is a simple listing tool with four optional filter/pagination params, all documented in the schema. The description covers the resource, return fields, and read-only nature. It could mention that results are paginated or filtered, but the schema already covers that, and the description suffices for basic 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for all four parameters (page, type, is_active, page_size), and each parameter already has descriptive text. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('the project's pages') and enumerates the returned fields (slug, title, type, is_homepage, is_active). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_page (single page) and create_page/update_page/delete_page (mutations).

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention get_page for individual pages or how it differs from list_blog_posts/list_content. The read-only note is behavioral, not usage direction.

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