List active packages

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clarifies that 'active' means unfinished and names the included fields, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, pagination, or default facility resolution. This is partial but not misleading.

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 two sentences with no filler. The action, scope, and returned fields are front-loaded, and the context line about being a processor's inventory view earns its place.

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 filtered-list tool, the description adequately covers resource semantics and returned fields, while the schema fully documents parameters. It could add pagination or default behavior details since there is no output schema, but the current text is sufficient for correct selection and invocation.

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 input schema covers all three parameters with descriptions, including the licenseNumber default behavior and the lastModified date range semantics. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail, so the schema carries the full weight, matching the baseline.

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 states a specific action ('List'), a defined resource ('active (unfinished) packages at a facility'), and enumerates the returned fields (label, item, quantity, lab testing state, hold status). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_items or get_package.

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 phrase 'day-to-day inventory view for a processor' gives a useful usage context, and 'active (unfinished)' defines the scope. However, it does not explicitly explain when to choose this over siblings such as get_package or list_items, nor mention any exclusions.

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