List RFQs

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the dual behavior and data dependency but does not mention read-only nature, safety, or side effects, missing opportunities for fuller transparency.

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?

Three concise sentences front-load the main purpose and add incremental details without waste, earning their place.

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?

The description covers main use cases and connections to other tools but lacks specification of return format or pagination defaults, which would be helpful given no output schema.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema for key parameters (rfq_id and status) and compensates for low schema coverage partially, but does not detail pagination 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?

The description clearly states the tool lists RFQs with filtering options and distinguishes its special behavior when rfq_id is provided, differentiating it from sibling get_quotes by indicating data flow.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool with rfq_id for supplier response status and connections to get_quotes, but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons to all siblings.

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