list_library_questions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description describes a read operation ('List'). The description adds context about templates and discovery, which is useful beyond the annotation. It does not discuss pagination or response format, but with annotations covering safety, the description is adequate.

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 concise: two sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the action and resource, and each sentence adds value (action + usage context).

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?

For a simple list tool with readOnlyHint and 2 parameters, the description covers purpose and usage well. It could mention that results are paginated (implied by offset parameter) or describe the response structure, but given the lack of output schema, it is still informative enough.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (libraryId and offset). The description does not add additional explanation or context for these parameters. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description does not reduce ambiguity.

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 action 'List' and the resource 'reusable survey questions in a Qualtrics library'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_questions by specifying the library scope, and adds context about using these as templates for discovery before copy/recreation.

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 a clear use case: 'discover complex question definitions before copying or recreating them'. This guides when to use the tool. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the sibling list implies other tools for direct creation.

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