gorelo_list_clients

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It does disclose cursor-based pagination and ascending client-id ordering, which are useful behavioral traits. However, it does not state whether the operation is read-only, what the response shape looks like, or how filters combine, leaving behavioral coverage partial.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the resource and verb, then adds the two most important behavioral details: cursor pagination and sort order.

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?

For an 8-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is too thin. It omits filter semantics, response shape, and usage context, so an agent may still struggle to invoke it correctly for non-trivial use cases.

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 describes 6 of 8 parameters, but query and statusIds have no descriptions. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning and does not clarify these two ambiguous fields, so it fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('clients'), and a scope ('for the service provider'), while also adding pagination and sort-order details. This makes it unambiguous against siblings like gorelo_get_client and gorelo_list_client_locations.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings such as gorelo_get_client or gorelo_list_client_locations. No conditions, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned, so usage is only implied by the tool name and verb.

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