list_documents

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: pagination support with limit parameters (max 100 records), and that it returns a list of documents. However, it doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, or whether this is a read-only operation (though 'List' implies read).

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement followed by detailed parameter explanations. Every sentence adds value, though the parameter documentation is quite detailed (which is necessary given the schema coverage gap). It could be slightly more concise in the parameter explanations.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, filtering/sorting/pagination), no annotations, but with an output schema present, the description is mostly complete. It thoroughly documents parameters and behavior, though could benefit from more context about when to use versus siblings and any system constraints.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 7 parameters, the description provides comprehensive parameter semantics beyond the schema. It explains each parameter's purpose, format examples (JSON strings, field lists), defaults, and constraints (max 100 for limit_page_length). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'List documents of a given DocType with optional filtering, sorting and pagination.' It specifies the verb ('List'), resource ('documents'), and scope ('DocType'), and distinguishes it from siblings like get_document (single document) or get_count (count only).

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 usage for listing documents with filtering/sorting/pagination, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_list_with_summary or search_link. It provides context but lacks explicit guidance on tool selection among siblings.

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