list_global_sections

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries most of the behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses the deliberate SLIM response shape, enumerates each returned field (id, name, slot, element count, type histogram, custom classes), and explicitly warns that the element tree is NOT returned. No pagination or rate-limit detail, but the output-behavior disclosure is strong.

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?

Front-loads the resource and the SLIM constraint in sentence one, then describes the entry shape, then states the exclusion and the alternative routing. Three tight sentences with no filler.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and explicitly naming what is omitted and where to get it. For a zero-parameter list tool this is complete enough to call correctly and to decide whether a follow-up drill-in is needed.

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 tool takes zero parameters (schema coverage 100%), so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. No misleading param claims are made.

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 reusable global sections') plus concrete examples (Header, Footer, content blocks), which makes the object unmistakable. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the drill-in siblings (get_global_section, search_global_section_elements, get_global_section_element), so an agent can separate listing from inspection without opening schemas.

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?

Clearly states this returns a SLIM summary and routes the agent to three named alternatives for the full element tree, with the reason ('the tree is large'). It does not fully clarify when to pick search_global_section_elements versus get_global_section_element, but the when-to-use and when-not-to-drill-here guidance is explicit and actionable.

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