rr_list_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It states it lists items but does not mention pagination, side effects, authorization needs, or that parameters like limit/offset support pagination. The description adds little beyond the name.

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?

While the description is short, it is under-specified rather than concise. It omits critical details, making it less helpful. A good concise description would be brief but informative.

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 5 parameters with no descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide enough information for an agent to correctly invoke the tool or understand its behavior.

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 0%. The description does not explain any of the five parameters (vendor_id, search, needs_review, limit, offset), leaving the agent to infer meaning from names alone. This is a significant gap.

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 'List inventory items' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like rr_list_purchase_orders and rr_list_suppliers. However, it lacks any additional context about the scope or filtration capabilities.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or context for its use in a workflow. The description is minimal and provides no decision support.

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