ghl_conversation_ai_list_actions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds the HTTP endpoint and OAuth scopes, which are useful for understanding access requirements, but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or other behavioral 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 short but contains redundancy ('List Actions for an Agent' followed by 'List for actions for an agent'). It could be more concise by removing duplication, but overall length is acceptable.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description lacks key details such as the structure of the response (e.g., what fields are returned), any default sorting or pagination behavior, and how to interpret the results. The endpoint and OAuth scopes are helpful but insufficient for full understanding.

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?

The only parameter, agentId, is not described in the description or input schema (0% schema description coverage). The description implies its existence but does not explain its format, source, or any constraints, leaving the agent without sufficient information to correctly provide the value.

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 it lists actions for an agent, using the verb 'List' and specifying the resource 'Actions for an Agent'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_action_by_id and create_action, though it doesn't explicitly call out differentiation.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ghl_conversation_ai_get_action_by_id or ghl_conversation_ai_search_agent. It does not specify prerequisites or context for use.

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