list_transactions

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

With no annotations, the description is the only behavioral signal. It communicates that this is a read ('List') operation but does not disclose ordering semantics of 'recent', pagination behavior beyond the schema default, or any account-access expectations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying what the tool does, and the key action and object appear first.

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?

Despite a four-parameter schema and no output schema, the description says nothing about default behavior, interpretation of 'recent', or how this differs from search_transactions. An agent is left without enough context to choose it confidently.

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 the baseline is 3; the schema already explains account_id, limit, since, and before. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond labeling the list as 'recent'.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('recent transactions for an account'), so an agent can tell what the tool targets. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this from sibling search_transactions or get_transaction, so it stops short of a 5.

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 or when-not-to-use guidance. With a sibling named search_transactions, the description should state whether list_transactions is for simple recent listings and search is for filtered/advanced queries, but it leaves that entirely to inference.

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