quotes_outstanding

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds inclusion/exclusion context (quote age, amounts, approved-not-converted exclusion), but does not disclose pagination behavior or response format, which would be useful. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The core action and inclusion criteria are front-loaded, with the exclusion as a clarifying second sentence.

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 paginated read tool with no output schema, the description explains what will be returned (quotes with age and amounts) and its scope. It does not explicitly mention pagination, but the schema's cursor and returned_so_far descriptions cover that. The lack of an output schema is partly mitigated by the high-level return description.

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 three parameters (cursor, page_size, returned_so_far) are documented in the input schema. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, hence baseline 3.

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 states a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('Jobber quotes awaiting client response'), and specifies the included data (quote age and amounts) and an exclusion (approved-but-not-converted). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like overdue_invoices or requests_inbox.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative routing is provided. The description implies usage for retrieving outstanding quotes, but does not mention when to prefer this over related tools like requests_inbox or get_record. The exclusion clause provides definitional clarity, not usage guidance.

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