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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses sort order (newest first), expiry normalization (requests past expiry read as expired), and — most valuably — a visibility model (owner/office see all; field workers see only their own or their agents' requests). It stops short of describing pagination or result shape, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then the optional filter, then behavior. Every sentence contributes new information with no waste.

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 list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, filtering, ordering, expiry handling, and access scoping well. The absence of any pagination/result-size guidance is the only notable omission.

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 maps shop_id to 'for a shop' and status to 'optionally by status' with the enum values, adding the important 'optional' nuance — but the enum values merely repeat the schema and shop_id's scope isn't elaborated. It adds only modest meaning beyond structured fields.

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+resource: lists approval requests for a shop, newest first. Clear what the tool returns and its default ordering. It does not explicitly differentiate from the close sibling approvals_get, but 'list ... newest first' makes the plural/collection nature evident.

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?

Usage is implied — you list approvals for a shop, optionally filtered by status — but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus approvals_get or when a filtered vs. full list is appropriate. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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