List Trash

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description aligns with these (read-only list operation) and adds no contradictions. While it doesn't disclose further behavioral traits, the operation is simple and annotations suffice.

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: first states purpose and output, second states usage and requirement. No redundancy, efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, prerequisite, and output fields. Lacks explicit description of return format (e.g., array of objects), but mentions 'ids and titles' which is enough. No output schema exists, so description compensates reasonably.

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?

Zero parameters, so baseline is 4. Description explicitly notes 'Takes no parameters', which is sufficient.

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?

Clearly states verb 'list' and resource 'documents in project trash', specifying returned fields (ids and titles). Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools restore_document and delete_document by mentioning their relationship.

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?

Provides explicit use cases: to see recoverable documents before restore, or to confirm deletion. Also states prerequisite 'Requires an open project', giving clear context for when to invoke.

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