Views 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. It does not say whether results are paginated by default, what filters accepts, whether this requires admin permissions, or how many views are returned per page. An output schema exists, so return shape is partially covered, but operating behavior is not.

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 with zero filler, which is good structure. However, the terseness borders on under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness, so it does not quite reach 5.

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 explained, but that is the only area covered. Three undocumented parameters, no annotations, and no pagination or filter semantics leave the definition incomplete for an agent to call it 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% and the description adds nothing about any of the three parameters. The generic 'filters' object is completely opaque, and the page_limit/page_offset pagination contract (defaults of 50 and 0) is undocumented. The description fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 (List) and resource (views on a Drupal site), which is unambiguous on its own. It does not explicitly name the sibling it contrasts with (views_get, views_execute), but the 'list all' phrasing naturally separates it from the CRUD/execute siblings.

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 mention of alternatives such as views_get for a single view or views_execute for running one, and no prerequisites. The agent must infer all routing decisions from the name alone.

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