list_trust_records

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

No annotations exist, and the description lacks behavioral details beyond listing records. It does not disclose pagination (though top/skip are in schema), rate limits, or read-only nature. The description carries the full burden yet offers little.

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 (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it omits essential details, making it feel under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 sophisticated schema (5 parameters, OData filtering) and the presence of sibling tools that filter by client/project/date, the description does not contextualize when this tool is appropriate. Output schema exists but is not referenced.

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 only explains filter_expr as OData filtering, adding value for that parameter. However, top, skip, select, and orderby are left unexplained, leaving significant gaps.

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 the action and resource: 'List trust accounting records.' It also notes that OData filtering is available via filter_expr. However, it does not differentiate this tool from sibling tools like list_trust_records_for_client, which list records filtered by specific criteria.

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?

The description provides minimal guidance: it suggests using filter_expr for OData filtering but does not advise when to use this generic list vs. the specialized list_trust_records_for_* tools. No exclusions or context for selection are given.

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