vaultix_list_charges

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'list all charges' but doesn't describe pagination behavior (e.g., default limit, how results are ordered), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens when filters return no results. The mention of 'optional filters' is minimal and doesn't explain how filtering works in practice.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core purpose ('List all charges') and adds only essential context ('with optional filters'). Every part earns its place.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a list operation. It doesn't explain the return format (e.g., array of charge objects), pagination, error handling, or how filters combine. For a tool with 3 parameters and rich sibling context, more behavioral details are needed to guide effective use.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents the three parameters (limit, status, payment_method) with their types, constraints, and enums. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying filtering exists, which is already covered in the schema. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the verb 'list' and resource 'charges' with scope 'all', making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling list tools like vaultix_list_customers or vaultix_list_products, which have similar 'list all X' patterns but different resources.

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 mentions 'optional filters' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it doesn't specify when to use vaultix_list_charges versus vaultix_get_charge (for a single charge) or vaultix_list_transactions (which might overlap in scope). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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