list_mailing_lists

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying that it returns 'one cursor-paginated page', disclosing the pagination behavior beyond the schema. However, it does not elaborate on error conditions or rate limits.

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 that conveys the essential information without redundant or extraneous words. It is well-structured and 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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description could have explained the return structure (e.g., list of mailing list objects with pagination token). However, the high schema coverage and annotation compensate somewhat, leaving it minimally adequate 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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional semantic value for individual parameters. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the description does not compensate with parameter-specific details.

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'), resource ('mailing lists'), scope ('in an XM Directory'), and includes the pagination detail ('one cursor-paginated page'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_mailing_list or list_directories.

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 mailing lists but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_mailing_list for a specific list). No when-not-to or prerequisite conditions are mentioned.

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