freshbooks_list_services

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe read operation. The description adds the domain context that services are billable work types, which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose pagination behavior, default page size, or whether the list is ordered, but the read-only safety is covered by 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, compact sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then adds a clarifying parenthetical. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff 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 simple read-only list tool with two optional pagination parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. The main gap is that it doesn't mention pagination behavior or defaults, but the parameter names and annotations cover the essential safety and scope. An agent can likely call this tool correctly with the current information.

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 the description carries the burden for parameter meaning. The description does not explain 'page' or 'per_page' beyond what the schema types imply. However, the parameter names are self-explanatory for pagination, and the schema provides constraints (exclusiveMinimum, maximum for per_page). The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('services'), and clarifies what services are ('billable work types available to projects and time entries'). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like freshbooks_list_invoices or freshbooks_list_clients, though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 usage context by defining services as billable work types for projects and time entries, which helps an agent know when this tool is relevant. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no mention of pagination usage.

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