mp_list_ticks

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

The description discloses a meaningful side effect: it will auto-fetch from MP when cache is empty or stale, revealing network and cache behavior not visible in the input schema. However, it does not explain cache freshness criteria, authentication requirements, or whether the returned data could be stale, so not all behavioral traits are covered.

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?

One sentence that immediately states the operation and the key caching behavior, with no filler or repetition of schema details. It is well structured and front-loaded.

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 tool has 6 optional filters and no output schema, and the description omits return value shape, pagination/limit behavior, and how it differs from mp_fetch_ticks. Without annotations, this leaves an agent under-informed for constructing the best call.

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?

All six parameters are fully described in the input schema, so the description does not need to repeat them. The description adds no extra meaning or examples for grade/area filter formats, leaving baseline schema value intact.

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 clear action ('List') and resource ('your personal ticks'), and indicates the MP data source and caching behavior. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling mp_fetch_ticks, leaving some ambiguity about when to prefer this over that tool.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as mp_fetch_ticks. The auto-fetch note implicitly says cache is handled, but there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions specifying when a different tool should be chosen.

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