List View Items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and mutability are covered. The description adds that this is a GET request listing tickets with cursor-based pagination, but it does not explain the open-world behavior or describe the response structure. No contradiction with annotations.

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 that front-loads the endpoint and clearly states the action and the pagination trait. It is appropriately sized with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 read-only list tool with a well-described schema and good annotations, this description is mostly sufficient. It clearly identifies the resource (tickets in a view) and pagination style, though it could be more complete by mentioning the return shape and explicitly differentiating from similar list/search tools.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description does not need to explain each parameter. The phrase 'cursor-based pagination' adds slight context for cursor/direction/limit, but it does not add meaningful semantics beyond what the schema already provides.

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 the specific verb 'List' and the specific resource 'tickets belonging to a view', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gorgias_list_tickets (all tickets) or gorgias_search_view_items (search across views). The endpoint path reinforces the action.

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 implies the tool is used when you have a view_id and want to list its tickets, and it mentions cursor-based pagination. However, it does not explicitly compare against alternatives such as gorgias_search_view_items or gorgias_list_tickets, nor does it state when not to use it.

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