receipt_list

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. 'List all registered receipts' communicates a read-only enumeration action, and naming the returned fields gives an agent a clear expectation of the output. It does not describe sorting, pagination, or potential empty results, but those are minor for such a simple list operation.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every element—verb, scope, and return fields—earns its place and directly supports agent decision-making.

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 no parameters and an output schema present, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It clearly states that the tool lists all registered receipts and indicates what information is returned. No additional context is necessary for a simple listing operation.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description reinforces that the tool lists 'all' receipts, implying no filtering is possible or needed. There are no parameter semantics to clarify further.

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 and resource: 'List all registered receipts.' It clearly identifies the operation's scope ('all') and names the output fields ('key, language, and last-fetch status'), making it distinct from sibling tools like receipt_show or receipt_delete.

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 states what the tool does but provides no guidance about when to prefer it over alternatives, such as receipt_show for a single receipt or receipt_add for creating one. It does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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