List published ETC Accountability Reports — the quarterly public record of where the dollars came from, what they paid for, what the public got, and what every Venture Member committed and delivered.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states the tool lists published reports but does not mention return format, sorting, pagination, or explicitly confirm read-only nature. The word 'list' implies a read operation, but important behavioral details are missing.
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 a single sentence that front-loads the action ('List published ETC Accountability Reports') and then adds meaningful context. Every word contributes value; no redundancies or filler.
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 no parameters and no output schema, the description explains the purpose and report contents, but it doesn't clarify whether the list returns full reports or summaries, nor does it reference the sibling tool 'get_accountability_report' for details. This ambiguity reduces completeness for an agent deciding between tools.
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?
Zero parameters exist, so baseline of 4 applies. The description adds useful context about what the reports contain (e.g., 'where the dollars came from'), which goes beyond the empty schema, though no specific parameter semantics are needed.
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 'List published ETC Accountability Reports' - a specific verb and resource. The addition of 'published' and 'quarterly public record' provides scope, and it distinguishes from the sibling tool 'get_accountability_report' by indicating a listing vs. retrieval 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 implies the tool is for browsing published reports but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like 'get_accountability_report'. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, leaving the agent to infer usage from the verb 'list'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action and resource: gigs have list/get/search/apply, reports have list/get, and events/services are separate. No two tools overlap in purpose or behavior.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: list_*, get_*, search_*, apply_to_*. The singular/plural distinction (get_gig vs list_gigs) is logical and consistent across resources.
With 8 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose. Each tool contributes to the core workflows of browsing gigs, applying, and accessing auxiliary information like reports and events.
The gig lifecycle is well covered: discovery (list/search), details (get), and action (apply). Minor gaps exist, such as no way to track or manage applications, but this is likely outside the server's intended agent-facing scope.
