İptal/İtiraz Taleplerini Listele

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'lists,' omitting whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or requires authentication.

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 one concise sentence, front-loading the essential information with no unnecessary words.

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?

Without annotations or output schema, the description is minimal. It lacks details about result count, pagination, or return format, making it incomplete for a list tool.

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%, and the parameters are fully described in the schema. The description mentions a date range but adds no new meaning beyond the schema's pattern and format.

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 clearly states the tool lists cancellation/objection requests in a specified date range. Verb and resource are specific, but it does not differentiate from sibling list tools like gib_list_documents.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings include gib_cancellation_request and gib_objection_request, but the description provides no context or exclusions.

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