List broadcasts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the appended 'Read-only' is largely redundant. The description does add real value by enumerating the possible status values and promising delivery stats, but says nothing about ordering, pagination limits, or total-count behavior for what is clearly a paged read.

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 dense sentence with the resource, the returned fields, and the status vocabulary front-loaded. Nothing extraneous; the only waste is the redundant 'Read-only' clause.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description is the only place the agent learns the return shape — it does name status and delivery stats, which helps, but gives no sense of the record structure or how to page through large result sets. Adequate but leaves real gaps for a paged list tool.

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 coverage is only 50%: limit is documented in the schema but offset has no description at all. The description never mentions paging, page size, or the 500 cap, so it fails to compensate for the undocumented offset parameter.

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 bulk-message broadcasts') and goes further by naming the status states and delivery stats returned. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling get_broadcast, so the agent must infer that this is the collection-level read.

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 listing intent is implied clearly by 'List ... on this account', but there is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus get_broadcast for a single broadcast, and no mention of paging through results. Usage is inferable but not routed.

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