voicememos_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default ordering ('newest first') and explains the meaning of each status value, which is genuinely useful behavior context. It does not state that this is a read-only/non-destructive operation, nor describe the returned fields or pagination edge cases (e.g., offset without limit).

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 first sentence front-loads the purpose and ordering, and the arg list is compact. The verbose `status` explanation is justified because the schema has no enums, though it makes the block slightly long.

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?

For a six-parameter list tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers filtering semantics but omits safety profile (read-only), shape of returned memo records, and how paging interacts with ordering. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 compensates well: it documents all six parameters, gives date formats for `since`/`until` (YYYY-MM-DD), clarifies substring/case-insensitivity for `title`, and enumerates the meaningful `status` values with explanations. Minor ambiguity remains about whether `status` accepts a single value or a list, and the `limit` default of 20 is only in the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('List memos') and adds ordering ('newest first'), which an agent can act on immediately. It does not, however, distinguish this from the sibling `voicememos_search`, so the agent must guess which listing tool to choose.

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 explicit statement of when to use this versus `voicememos_search` or the read/status siblings. The filter parameters imply a browsing use case, but the agent is left to infer that from the arg docs alone.

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