housecallpro_list_links

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral context that retrieval tokens are credentials and are never returned. This reassures the agent that the tool is safe and privacy-preserving beyond what the annotation alone conveys.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. The action and resource are front-loaded, and the security caveat about tokens is stated succinctly.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool, the description is nearly complete: it states what is returned and what is deliberately omitted. It could add slightly more about how the links are represented, but the core behavior is clear.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter information for the description to add. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on what the list contains rather than input semantics.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('Housecall Pro customer links'), and a clear scope ('this server is configured with'). It also clarifies what is included (labels and document kinds) and what is excluded (retrieval tokens), fully distinguishing this tool from the estimate/invoice/company siblings.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: when you need the configured Housecall Pro customer links rather than operating on a specific estimate, invoice, or company. It provides clear context but does not explicitly name alternatives or 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.