firefly_list_operations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that listing can be filtered by entity, which is also present in the schema; it does not describe return format, pagination, or how 'operations' are represented.

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, front-loaded sentence that names the action, the resource, and the optional modifier. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 a simple one-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description is mostly sufficient. It could be more complete by clarifying what an 'operation' is or how the returned catalogue relates to the sibling tools, but nothing essential to making the call is missing.

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%: the single optional 'entity' parameter is fully described with an enum and an explanation. The description merely restates this as 'filtered by entity,' adding no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('available Firefly III operations') and a qualifier ('optionally filtered by entity'). This unambiguously distinguishes the tool from the sibling mutating/querying tools without needing to open the schema.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus firefly_query, firefly_mutate, firefly_destructive, or firefly_get_schema. It does not say, for example, that this is a discovery step before invoking other tools, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternative conditions.

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