pin_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action but lacks behavioral details: it doesn't specify if this requires authentication, what happens if the list is already pinned, rate limits, or what the output contains. The description is minimal and doesn't compensate for missing annotations.

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 zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 one parameter, no annotations, and an output schema (which reduces need to describe returns), the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks parameter details and behavioral context, leaving gaps for effective tool use.

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 0%, with one parameter ('list_id') undocumented in the schema. The description adds no parameter information—it doesn't explain what 'list_id' is, how to obtain it, or its format. This fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 'Pin a list to your profile' clearly states the action (pin) and target resource (list), with the destination (profile) providing context. It distinguishes from siblings like 'unpin_list' (opposite action) and 'get_user_lists' (read operation), though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all similar tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the action is clear, there's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing list), exclusions, or comparisons to related tools like 'update_list' or 'follow_list'.

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