List HIG topics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose a key trait: the output contains titles and official URLs, not article text. It says nothing about pagination, the effect of the limit parameter, or whether filters combine with AND semantics, so the read-only list behavior is only partially covered.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler. Purpose comes first, filtering second, and the output-shape caveat last, which is exactly the right order.

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 no output schema, the description correctly compensates by describing the return contents (titles and URLs, not body text). What remains missing is limit/default behavior and whether multiple filters are combined, both of which an agent would want for a 4-parameter tool.

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 75%, so the schema already documents group, section, and platform with examples and 2 enums. The description restates the same three filter dimensions without adding format, default, or combination semantics, and never mentions the limit parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List Apple Human Interface Guidelines topics") and implicitly separates itself from get_topic by noting it returns titles and URLs rather than article text. However, it never names search_hig, the nearest sibling, so the list-vs-search distinction is only inferable.

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?

"Filter by section, component group, or platform" describes how to narrow results, which implies the browsing use case, but gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to search_hig. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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