list_manifests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the tool as listing data (implying read-only), but does not explicitly state read-only nature, auth requirements, rate limits, or data freshness. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, front-loading the core functionality and following with usage guidance. No extraneous words; every sentence 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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and return values (counts, weight). It lacks details on pagination behavior and sorting, but is sufficient for a listing endpoint. Sibling tools are distinct.

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 50% (date and region have descriptions), and the description mentions date and region as grouping criteria. However, limit and offset lack descriptions both in schema and description, requiring the agent to infer their purpose. The description adds value for date and region but does not compensate for pagination parameters.

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 it lists outbound manifests grouped by destination region and date, with shipment counts and total weight. The verb 'List' and resource 'outbound manifests' are specific, and the context distinguishes from sibling tools like get_manifest and search_shipments.

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 explicitly says 'Use for capacity and dispatch questions,' providing a clear usage context. It does not detail when not to use or mention alternatives, but the suggested use case is sufficient.

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