List disposition items

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

The description repeats 'Read-only' which is already declared via annotations (readOnlyHint: true). It adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, ordering, filtering, or response format. With annotations covering safety, the description contributes little beyond the annotation.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. No wasted words; every word earns its place.

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?

This is a simple list tool with one parameter and no output schema. The description, combined with the straightforward operation, is mostly adequate. However, it does not mention whether the list is paginated or what fields are returned, which would be helpful given the absence of an output schema.

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 coverage is 100% since the id parameter has a description ('GUID of the disposition'). The description does not add any extra meaning about the parameter, but with full schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List the items on a disposition' uses a specific verb (list) and resource (items on a disposition), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_disposition (which gets the disposition itself) and add_disposition_items (which adds items). It is precise and unambiguous.

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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The read-only hint is covered by annotations, but the description does not mention contexts such as 'use this to preview items before modifying a disposition' or exclude any siblings. Usage is only implied by the name and description.

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