retrieve_vip_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered without the description. The description adds essentially nothing beyond that: no pagination defaults for page/size, no note on how multiple filters combine, no result ordering behavior, and no return shape (there is no output schema either).

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?

It is very short and front-loaded, but the two lines are partially redundant ("List VIPs" then "List and filter all vips"). Two of the three pieces of information are the endpoint tag and a restatement, so the space is not fully earned.

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 14-parameter list tool the schema fully carries the input burden, so the call can be made correctly. What is missing is output-side context: no output schema exists and the description says nothing about what a VIP record contains or how paging behaves, which leaves a real gap for a paginated collection endpoint.

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%, so all 14 parameters are documented in the schema itself, which sets the baseline at 3. The description names neither the filters nor pagination, so it contributes no semantics beyond the structured fields.

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 ("List VIPs" / "List and filter all vips in your account") and the HTTP endpoint, so the agent knows it is a collection read. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling retrieve_vip (singular), which an agent could plausibly confuse it with.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling retrieve_vip for single-VIP lookups. The only hint is the word "filter", which implies a query use case but leaves selection between retrieval tools to inference.

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