List Bid Uploads

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, etc.), the description adds behavioral context: pagination control ('Use page and per_page'), return format ('paginated JSON array'), and API endpoint details. It does not contradict annotations. The added value is substantial for a read-only list operation.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. It covers usage guidance, return format, pagination, required params, and API context without redundancy. Every sentence adds value, making it efficient and well-structured.

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 simplicity (list operation), complete schema coverage, and helpful annotations, the description provides all necessary context: what it does, when to use, pagination details, required parameters, and endpoint reference. No gaps for agent decision-making.

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 has 100% description coverage, providing baseline of 3. The description adds value by explicitly stating required parameters and explaining pagination behavior ('page and per_page to control pagination; the response includes pagination metadata'). This helps an agent understand how to use the parameters effectively.

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 'Fetches a list of Bid Uploads for a Bid' with a specific verb and resource. It explains the purpose (enumerate records, paginated overview, find IDs, filter). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling 'list_bid_*' tools like list_bid_forms or list_bid_contacts, so it stops short of a perfect score.

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 usage context: 'Use this to enumerate Bid Management records when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' This gives guidance on when to use, but it does not mention when NOT to use or suggest alternative tools. The context is clear but lacks exclusion criteria.

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