get_udf_list_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose that the call is a retrieval ('Returns') and that it wraps NBAPI GetUDFListItems, but it says nothing about error behavior, response shape, or whether any side effects exist.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action and resource before the NBAPI wrapper reference. Every clause earns its place.

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 one-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema, the description is mostly sufficient to invoke it. However, with no output schema, it leaves the shape of the returned items unspecified, and it lacks usage or error 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 100% and the schema already documents UDFLISTKEY as required and unique. The description merely restates the parameter without adding format, source, or additional semantic detail, so it stays at the baseline.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Returns'), resource ('items of a single UDF list'), and required key (UDFLISTKEY). The word 'single' and 'items' clearly differentiate it from the sibling get_udf_lists, which retrieves the lists themselves.

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?

Usage is implied: an agent can infer it should call this tool when it has a UDFLISTKEY and wants that list's items. However, it never explicitly states when to prefer this over get_udf_lists or any alternative, and it gives no exclusions.

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