list_inquiries

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to reiterate. It adds minor context about the output fields, but does not disclose pagination, ordering, or limits. Adequate but not exemplary.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action verb 'List', no redundant words. Efficient and to the point.

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?

With no output schema, the description provides enough context by listing the fields returned. However, it omits details like whether the list is sorted, paginated, or filtered. Still, for a simple list tool, it is mostly complete.

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?

No parameters in schema, so the description does not need to explain any. Baseline 4 for zero-parameter tool is appropriate; no additional meaning needed.

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?

Description clearly states the action (list) and resource (vendor inquiries) and specifies the fields returned (status, vendor name, unread flag). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling list tools like list_guests or list_vendors.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_inquiry_conversation or mark_inquiry_read. No mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions. Sibling tools are many but no comparative hints.

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