ghl_custom_menu_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds security context (agency token) and pagination behavior, but does not significantly extend beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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 well-structured with clear sections (token requirement, overview, endpoint details, OAuth, pagination). It is front-loaded with the important warning. It could be slightly more concise by removing redundant phrases like 'This endpoint allows clients to retrieve...'.

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 list tool with 5 parameters, high schema coverage, and readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description covers essential aspects: token requirement, filtering via query and locationId, and pagination. It is missing output description and sort options, but these are not critical for a basic list operation.

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 is 3. The description adds a minor note on pagination purpose but does not add substantial meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions already provide.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'Custom Menu Links', and explains it fetches a collection based on criteria. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, get_by_id, update by being a list operation.

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 critical prerequisite (agency-level token) and explains pagination (skip, limit) for full result sets. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs. not use alternatives, though the listing context is clear from siblings.

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