list_collection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden of behavioral disclosure. It's a read operation but nothing states safety, return format, pagination behavior, or ordering. For a list tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 description is a single concise sentence with zero waste. It's appropriately front-loaded with the verb and action. However, it is perhaps too terse given the 5-parameter schema with 0% coverage.

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 5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and a list operation, the description should provide more clarity about filter semantics, return structure, and relationship to siblings. An output schema exists which helps, but the description itself is inadequate for a tool with this complexity.

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%, so the description must compensate. The description mentions 'optional filters' which generally maps to the 5 filter parameters, but it doesn't explain what each filter does (e.g., what 'variant' means, how minimum_quantity behaves). The generic 'optional filters' phrase adds some context but not per-parameter semantics.

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 states 'List local collection rows with optional filters' which gives a clear verb+resource (list collection) and mentions filtering capability. However, it doesn't distinguish from siblings like list_watchlist, and 'local' is ambiguous in meaning. It distinguishes the core action but lacks specificity about scope differentiation.

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 when-to-use guidance or alternatives are mentioned. The description doesn't clarify how this differs from related tools like list_watchlist, collection_summary, or value_collection. A user must guess when to choose this over siblings.

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