Get Instances Transfers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description nevertheless adds nothing whatsoever – no indication of result volume, pagination behavior, filtering semantics, or whether results are limited to the instance given the required instance_id.

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?

Two words are as short as possible, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness – there is no front-loaded statement of scope, filters, or result behavior to anchor the call.

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?

A 10-parameter, filter-heavy list endpoint with no output schema and an instance-scoped required parameter demands far more description than a two-word phrase. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly – scope, filter combination rules, pagination approach, or return shape – is present.

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 60%, and several parameters (status enum, wallet_id, customer_id, instance_id) have no schema description at all. The description contributes zero parameter meaning, so it fails to compensate for the gap, particularly the ambiguous status values (e.g. 'refunded') and the relationship between offset/limit and the cursor parameters.

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?

"Retrieve Transfers" restates the tool name/title (Get Instances Transfers) with no added specificity. Despite the schema showing pagination cursors, filters by token/status/network/wallet/customer, and an instance_id scoping parameter, the description never even clarifies that this is a paginated list operation for a given instance rather than fetching a single transfer.

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 when-to-use, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of the obvious alternatives in the sibling set such as GetV1InstancesTransfersById for a single transfer or PostV1InstancesTransfers for creation. The agent must infer everything from the name.

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