list_contracts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' strongly implies a read-only operation, and the filter behavior is disclosed. However, it does not confirm absence of side effects, mention access requirements, pagination, or result scoping, leaving moderate 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?

One concise sentence with a clear verb, resource, and filter context. No fluff, no repetition of schema details, and the most important information is 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?

There is an output schema, so return values need not be described. The tool is simple with two optional params, but the description omits details like whether both filters can be used together, filter combination logic, and pagination behavior. It is adequate for straightforward calls but not fully complete.

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's phrase 'filtered by workspace or team' is the main semantic signal for team_id and workspace_id. It clarifies that these are optional filters, which adds meaning beyond the raw schema, though it does not explain whether they can be combined or how they interact.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List acceptance contracts') and notes optional filters, making its purpose immediately clear. It is distinct from siblings like get_contract_detail (single contract), create_acceptance_contract (creation), and list_workspaces (different resource).

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 implies when to use it (listing contracts, optionally scoped by workspace or team) but does not contrast it with alternatives such as get_contract_detail or list_pending_reviews. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance is given, though the filter context provides some situating.

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