ghl_association_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds useful context: OAuth scopes, pagination behavior, and the exact endpoint, which goes beyond annotations to disclose operational details.

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, with purpose stated upfront and additional details (endpoint, OAuth, pagination) in a structured manner. The renaming note is slightly extraneous but adds context without bloating.

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 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, OAuth, pagination, and endpoint. It lacks description of the return format, but given the tool's simplicity and the presence of annotations, it is sufficiently 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains that skip and limit are pagination parameters and implies locationId is the sub-account ID. However, it lacks detailed semantics (e.g., format, default values, or examples beyond the schema's minimal examples).

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: 'Get all associations for a sub-account / location' and 'Get all Associations'. It distinguishes from siblings by being the only list operation among association tools, and the renaming note clarifies its evolution from 'find' to 'list'.

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 basic guidelines: it mentions OAuth scopes (associations.readonly) and pagination parameters (skip, limit) for paging through results. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other association tools or when not to use it.

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