kyt_list_cases

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses scope (organisation's cases), read-only nature via 'List', and the returned field set. It does not cover pagination, ordering, or authorization, but for a simple list operation the core behavior is transparent.

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 compact sentences with the verb first, followed by use case and output fields. No filler or repetition of schema data.

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 low-complexity list tool with no required params, the description supplies the key invocation context: what it returns and when to filter. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit field list, though pagination behavior is left implicit in the schema's limit parameter.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions and enum values, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the status filter's purpose ('needing review or escalation') but adds no new parameter details beyond the schema.

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?

States a clear verb ('List'), resource ('your organisation's compliance cases'), and the available filter dimension. Mentioning included fields distinguishes it from list screenings or single-case tools like kyt_get_case.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to use it: to list cases and filter by status for review or escalation. It does not name sibling alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a full routing rule.

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