erpnext_doc_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond those: the limit parameter is honored without a hidden cap, and has_more cannot be trusted on a full page unless include_total is set. These are exactly the runtime gotchas structured annotations cannot express.

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?

Two short sentences with zero filler; the operative verb 'List' is front-loaded and the caveat sentence follows the primary claim. Every word earns its place, and the most actionable information appears first.

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?

With eight parameters and zero schema descriptions, two caveat sentences are not enough. The output schema covers return values and annotations cover safety, but filter formats, or_filters semantics, order_by syntax, and offset behavior are left entirely to domain guessing.

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 0%, placing the full burden on the description. It only hints at two of the eight parameters — limit via 'hidden limit clamp' and include_total via 'without total' — while filters, or_filters, order_by, fields, offset, and doctype receive no semantic clarification.

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 verb and scope — 'List one page' — and the tool name plus the required doctype parameter make the resource (ERPNext documents of a doctype) reasonably inferable. It gestures at differentiation with 'without a hidden limit clamp' but never explicitly names the resource or contrasts itself with siblings like erpnext_doc_get or erpnext_plan_list.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tool is named. The phrase 'without a hidden limit clamp' implies a contrast with other listing paths, and the has_more caveat hints at pagination trade-offs, but the agent is left to infer selection criteria entirely.

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