wb_documents_list

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior, but it contains no verb or behavioral trait: it does not say the tool returns a list, is read-only, paginates, or requires authentication. It only names document types, making it no more informative than a noun phrase.

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 text is very short, but it is structured as a noun phrase and an appended purpose rather than a complete tool description. It is under-specified rather than efficiently complete.

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?

Without an output schema or annotations, this description is not enough to invoke the tool correctly: it never states what the tool does, what it returns, or how parameters shape the result. It only provides the general financial-document context.

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 coverage is 80%, so the input schema already documents most parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the baseline for high schema coverage is 3.

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 identifies the domain ('Seller financial documents: acts, УПД, notices') and the accounting use case, but never states an explicit verb such as 'lists' or 'returns'. It relies on the tool name for the operation and does not differentiate from siblings like wb_documents_categories or wb_document_download.

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 'Needed for accounting' gives a use context, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no comparison to closely related sibling tools such as wb_document_download, wb_documents_download_bulk, or wb_documents_categories.

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