mirlo_list_tickets

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, default ordering, rate limits, or what happens when no filters are applied. The description is too minimal to guide appropriate use.

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?

At only 5 words, it is extremely concise but lacks structure and essential information. It does not front-load key details like the fact that results are paginated or that it can filter by state, priority, etc.

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?

Given the tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention pagination, ordering, or the behavior of the search parameter, making it insufficient for correct invocation.

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?

With schema description coverage at only 29% (low), the description should compensate by explaining parameters. Instead, it merely says 'with filters' without detailing any parameter semantics. The agent gains no insight into how to use the available parameters.

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 clearly states it lists support tickets with filters, distinguishing it from sibling list tools for other entities (accounts, contacts, etc.). However, it does not elaborate on what 'filters' means, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other list tools (e.g., mirlo_list_conversations). There are no exclusions or context indicating prerequisites or appropriate scenarios.

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