Coda List Formulas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the result set contains name/ID/value metadata, and the disambiguation between doc-level named formulas and column formulas prevents a wrong-scope call. Pagination behavior is left to the schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then return shape, then disambiguation and the alternative. No filler sentences and every clause carries 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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be spelled out, and the rich annotations cover the safety profile; the schema documents all three parameters. The description covers purpose, scope and the sibling alternative, leaving only minor details such as pagination to structured fields.

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%, so limit, cursor and doc_id are fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, format or constraint detail beyond that, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource (list named formulas in a doc) and immediately scopes it: 'doc-level computed values (not column formulas)'. This lets an agent separate it from coda_get_formula and from column-related siblings like coda_list_columns without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: 'Use coda_get_formula to get a specific formula's current value', and the named-vs-column-formula note implies when this tool is the right one. It lacks an explicit exclusion list for the other list_* siblings, but the selection condition for the main alternative is stated.

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