Field Config List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no read-only confirmation, no auth/permission requirements, no pagination behavior. The claim 'List all' is even mildly in tension with the presence of page_limit (default 50) and page_offset, since results are actually paginated rather than complete.

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 sentence, front-loaded, with zero filler. It is well-formed but so minimal that one could argue it is under-specified rather than concise; still, there is no wasted text.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and that is the only relief. For a paginated, filterable list tool with no annotations and three undocumented parameters, the definition leaves the agent unable to use filtering or pagination correctly.

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% for three parameters, and the description adds nothing about 'filters', 'page_limit', or 'page_offset'. With the lowest possible coverage, the description was required to compensate and it provides no parameter meaning at all.

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 clear verb+resource pair ('List all field configurations') with a site scope, so an agent understands the operation. However, it does nothing to distinguish it from the very similar sibling field_storage_list or from field_config_get, which an agent in this large tool set would need.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no condition selecting this over field_config_get or field_storage_list, and no mention of when filtering is preferable. The agent gets a bare statement of function with no routing context.

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