elster_submissions_list

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the burden and does reasonably well: it declares the operation read-only and describes exactly what the listing returns. It omits pagination/scope limits, permission requirements, or ordering behavior, so it stops short of full disclosure.

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?

One dense, front-loaded sentence that lists scope then return payload then downstream consumers, with no filler. The German UI-path notation is heavy but earns its place as the exact locator.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields (filing, date, Ordnungskriterium, aufgabeId, nachrichtId), and the sole parameter is covered by the schema. Adequate for a simple list tool, though read-only behavior and any result limits are only lightly covered.

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 100% and the single formFilter parameter is fully documented in the schema with an example. The description adds nothing about the filter, so the baseline of 3 applies — the schema does all the work.

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 specific verb and resource (lists filed submissions under 'Meine Formulare' → 'Übermittelte Formulare') and enumerates the returned fields, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like elster_drafts_list or elster_belege_list without opening a schema.

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?

It explains downstream use cases explicitly — the aufgabeId is for reuse as a Datenübernahme source and the nachrichtId is consumed by elster_submission_protocol — giving clear context. It does not, however, say when to prefer this over elster_drafts_list or state any exclusion conditions.

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