vaultix_list_refunds

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, authentication needs, return format, or whether it's read-only (implied but not explicit). This is inadequate for a list operation with potential complexity.

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 extremely concise with just three words, front-loaded with the core action. There's zero waste, making it easy to parse, though this brevity contributes to gaps in other dimensions.

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, no output schema, and a list operation with potential behavioral nuances (e.g., ordering, pagination), the description is incomplete. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to use the tool effectively beyond the basic schema.

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 'limit' and 'charge' parameters. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, not even hinting at parameter usage. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 'List all refunds' clearly states the action (list) and resource (refunds), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'vaultix_get_refund' (singular) or 'vaultix_list_charges' (similar list pattern). It lacks specificity about what 'all' means (e.g., time range, status).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'vaultix_get_refund' for a specific refund or 'vaultix_list_charges' for related data. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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