List Submittal Statuses

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the tool is safe and non-destructive. The description adds value by explaining pagination behavior (page and per_page control, pagination metadata) and the specific endpoint, enhancing transparency beyond 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 four sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and includes all necessary details without redundancy. Each sentence serves a purpose: stating the action, giving use case, explaining pagination response, and listing required params/API info.

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 mentions that the tool returns a 'paginated JSON array of Company Settings' and includes pagination metadata, but it does not describe the structure or fields of individual items. With no output schema, this omission leaves the agent uninformed about the response format, hindering completeness.

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% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description repeats that company_id is required and page/per_page control pagination, adding marginal value by mentioning pagination metadata. Baseline is 3, and the added context does not significantly elevate it.

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 'Return a list of all Submittal Statuses from a specified Company,' which uses a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling list tools by specifically naming the resource, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 some guidance on when to use the tool: 'to enumerate Company Settings when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' However, it does not mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, leaving room for ambiguity in tool selection.

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