xero_list_attachments

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

The description notes routing details but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, any side effects on Xero, or output structure (though output schema exists). Without annotations, this is insufficient for a list operation.

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?

The description is short and front-loaded with the operation name, but it is not appropriately sized for the information needed. It wastes space on routing details while omitting crucial functional details. It earns a 3 for being brief but not effective.

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's complexity (Xero connector with output schema) and zero schema descriptions, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain what attachments are, what input arguments are valid, or what the output represents, leaving a significant gap.

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?

The single parameter 'arguments' is described as a 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation,' which adds no semantic value beyond the schema ('type: string'). With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain expected keys or structure but does not, making it nearly useless.

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 repeats the tool name 'list_attachments' and adds 'Xero connector operation' but fails to specify what attachments are listed (e.g., attachments on invoices, contacts, or general). It does not distinguish from sibling tools like xero_get_attachment or xero_upload_attachment, making it vague.

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 alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it, leaving the agent without decision support.

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