List postings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds value beyond annotations by revealing that each posting reports canDelete and lockReasons, and by stating the default calendar-year date range.

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?

Three dense sentences front-load the core action and resource, then add filters and behavioral details. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 description covers the core operation, filter options, default date range, and a notable response characteristic (canDelete/lockReasons). It does not mention pagination or sorting, but for a read-only list tool with no output schema, this is reasonably 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 coverage is 100% with individual descriptions for all 10 parameters. The description groups filters semantically (account, voucher, customer, etc.) but does not add new meanings beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 a list operation on individual ledger postings with a date range and multiple optional filters. It distinguishes from sibling tools like reai_list_vouchers and reai_general_ledger by specifying 'individual ledger postings'.

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 implies usage context through the date range and optional filters, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like reai_list_vouchers or reai_general_ledger. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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