b24_bizproc_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully discloses that only active instances are returned and the verb 'Lista' implies a read operation, but it omits any statement about read-only guarantees, pagination, error behavior, authentication, or output shape.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It states the action, the resource, and the filtering dimensions efficiently.

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 no output schema and no annotations, so the description should compensate by explaining return values and operational context. It leaves webhook_url unexplained and does not describe the structure of the returned instances, pagination, or any call prerequisites.

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 coverage is 67%: entity and entity_id have descriptions, while webhook_url does not. The description reinforces that entity and entity_id act as filters, but it does not clarify webhook_url's role or the optionality/combination rules for the 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 uses a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('instancias de procesos de negocio activas'), and it states the filtering dimensions. It is clear enough to distinguish from b24_bizproc_start, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools.

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 when to use the tool: to list active business process instances, optionally filtered by entity or record. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or what alternatives exist, such as b24_bizproc_start for starting processes.

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