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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: ownership scoping, auth key requirement, newest-first ordering, and cursor-based pagination. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Single sentence that packs in resource, scope, auth requirement, ordering, and pagination with no filler. Every phrase earns its place and the core action is 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?

For a read-only listing tool with a rich output schema, robust annotations, and fully documented optional parameters, the description covers all essential operational details an agent needs: auth, scope, ordering, and pagination.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains both parameters. The description adds context about ordering and cursor pagination but does not introduce new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('List'), resource ('documents and bundles'), scope ('owned by the authenticated account'), ordering ('newest first'), and pagination ('cursor'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_doc (single document), delete_doc (mutation), and create_bundle (creation).

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 makes clear this is the listing operation for the authenticated account's documents and bundles, and it notes the required lp_ API key context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the listing scope is unambiguous and enough to route an agent correctly.

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