list_scores_v2

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

No annotations provided; description only states basic function. Does not disclose read-only nature, rate limits, ordering, or any behavioral traits beyond listing. The output schema may define structure but description adds no transparency.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded, but at the expense of omitting crucial details like pagination or filter behavior. Acceptable but not optimal for a complex tool.

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?

With 17 optional parameters and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain filter interactions, defaults, or result format, relying entirely on the input schema for context.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all 17 parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'optional filters', so it neither harms nor improves parameter understanding compared to schema alone.

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 states 'List scores from the score v2 API with optional filters,' which clearly identifies the verb (list) and resource (scores). It distinguishes from sibling 'get_score_v2' by implying multiple vs single scores, but does not mention pagination explicitly.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_score_v2'. The description merely says 'optional filters' without explaining filter semantics or providing examples.

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