make_list_scenarios

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions result capping and fallback behavior. Does not explicitly state read-only nature or authentication needs, but implies non-destructive listing.

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?

Two clear, efficient sentences. Every sentence adds value without fluff.

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?

Covers key aspects: what it lists, filtering options, pagination awareness (capped). No output schema, but response indicator is mentioned. Adequate for a list 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 100% so baseline 3. Description adds context on fallback and 'capped' indicator, but not significantly beyond schema 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?

Clearly states 'List Make.com scenarios (automations) for a team or organization.' Specific verb+resource+scope. Differentiates from siblings like make_get_scenario (single) and make_list_executions.

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?

Provides guidance on providing team_id or organization_id, fallback behavior, and active_only parameter. Does not explicitly mention when not to use, but context is clear given siblings.

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