list_services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to state that this is a read-only/safe operation, does not describe what happens when filters are omitted (likely returns all accessible services), and provides no information about the return format or pagination behavior despite the presence of limit/page parameters.

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 single sentence is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core action, containing no redundant words. However, brevity here comes at the cost of necessary behavioral and contextual details.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, no output schema, and the potential confusion with canned services, the description is insufficient. It fails to describe return values, safety characteristics, or the relationship between services and work orders that would help an agent invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema adequately documents all four parameters (orderId, locationId, limit, page). The description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema, which warrants the baseline score of 3 for high-coverage schemas.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('services'), and scopes it to 'work orders in Shopmonkey' which distinguishes it from the sibling 'list_canned_services'. However, it misses the opportunity to explicitly clarify the difference between actual work order services vs. canned service templates.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_canned_service' for templates or 'get_order' for order details), nor does it mention that all parameters are optional or suggest when filtering by orderId is appropriate.

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