Get date of last list update

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the specific return format (dd.mm.yyyy) and the concept of a list 'status' being its last update date, which is a small behavioral detail. It does not disclose any additional side effects, permissions, or edge cases, so the description adds only modest value beyond the 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?

The description is just two sentences. The first sentence states the action and output format, while the second gives a concise use case. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 low complexity (one required parameter, no nested objects), the schema fully documents the input, and an output schema exists for the return value, the description is complete. It clearly states what the tool returns and why it would be used, which is sufficient for correct selection and invocation.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for the single 'list' parameter, including its enum values and a description of what 'sanctions' and 'pep' mean. The tool description does not introduce any additional parameter semantics, so it relies on the schema's completeness, earning the baseline of 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 opens with 'Returns the date (dd.mm.yyyy) of the last update of the selected easycompliance list', which clearly identifies the verb, resource, and scope. It also differentiates from sibling tools like check_sanctions_list and check_pep_list by focusing on list metadata rather than list content.

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 phrase 'Useful to verify data freshness' gives a clear use case and implies when to choose this tool (when you need update timestamps). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, so it falls short of a 5, but the context is still clear.

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