kontist_list_transactions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose the 50-item default and the EUR inflow/outflow sign convention, but it omits ordering semantics, pagination behavior beyond the schema's cursor field, and any explicit read-only/safety statement.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then supplies the most decision-relevant behavioral facts: default result count and currency sign semantics.

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?

For a list tool with six optional filters and pagination, the description is adequate but not complete. It covers defaults and units, but with no output schema it doesn't describe return shape, and ordering and pagination usage remain implicit rather than explicitly explained.

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 schema already documents all six parameters at 100% coverage, so the description only needs to add interpretive value. It does add the important sign convention ('positive = inflow, negative = outflow') and reinforces the default limit, which helps the agent correctly set min_amount and max_amount.

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 identifies the action ('List') and resource ('Kontist transactions'), and adds useful scope details like optional filters and a 50-item default. It doesn't explicitly contrast itself with kontist_get_transaction, but the plural listing vs singular retrieval is reasonably evident from the name and wording.

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 gives no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus siblings such as kontist_get_transaction or kontist_get_balance. It implies broad, filterable listing, but the agent must infer routing from tool names rather than from stated usage criteria.

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