list_my_lists

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the main action and the side effect (cache refresh), which is good. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only on the underlying data, any rate limits, or what the output format is (e.g., array of objects). This leaves some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two sentences, both front-loaded with the primary purpose. No redundant words. Every sentence adds value. Highly concise.

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 tool with no parameters and a simple listing action, the description covers the core function and a notable side effect. However, without an output schema, it should describe the return format (e.g., list of objects with fields) to be fully self-contained. The side effect is useful but not enough to reach completeness.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter information (none needed), but also does not elaborate on the input context beyond what is already clear from 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?

The description clearly states the action ('List all punch lists') and the resource scope ('linked to your API key'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_list (singular) and list_items (items within a list) by specifying the full collection. The side effect ('refreshes token cache') adds specificity.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when not to use it, alternative tools, or prerequisites. The side effect about cache refresh is incidental but not a directive for decision-making.

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