List Cashouts

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds the endpoint and pagination context, but does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as filtering options or default ordering, making it adequate but not rich.

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 a single sentence with no filler, front-loading the core action and resource. It earns its place by adding endpoint and pagination context.

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?

The tool has no output schema, and the description only says it lists cashouts with pagination. It does not mention the available filters (status, startDate, endDate) or what fields are returned, leaving some gaps. However, the rich annotations and self-explanatory schema parameters compensate partially, making it minimally complete.

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 40%, with date fields documented in the schema. The description mentions pagination, which aligns with page/pageSize, but does not explain the status filter or date range semantics beyond the schema. Since the schema covers some details and the remaining params are self-explanatory, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('saques'), and adds pagination detail and the API endpoint, clearly distinguishing it from get_cashout, create_cashout, and other siblings.

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 clearly indicates when to use this tool: when you need a list of cashouts with pagination. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as for retrieving a single cashout, so it misses explicit exclusion criteria.

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