freshbooks_list_services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds domain context about services being billable work types, but says nothing about pagination behavior, result ordering, or volume despite taking page/per_page — modest added value over the 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with a parenthetical clarification — nothing wasted, and the key concept ('services') leads.

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 read-only list tool this is close to sufficient, but with no output schema and no mention of pagination semantics or response shape, an agent lacks the information needed to page through results correctly.

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 0%, so neither 'page' nor 'per_page' is documented anywhere; the description contributes no syntax, defaults, or limits. With two parameters wholly undocumented in both schema and description, the parameter burden is largely unmet.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('services') and usefully glosses the domain term as 'the billable work types available to projects and time entries,' which disambiguates it from items or projects. It does not explicitly name a sibling or contrast against freshbooks_list_items, so it falls short of a 5.

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 when-to-use context, no prerequisites, and no guidance about alternatives such as freshbooks_list_items or freshbooks_list_projects. An agent knows what it returns but not when to reach for it.

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