Get All Company Items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond annotations, such as pagination with startIndex and retrieveSize parameters and a maximum of 200 items per request.

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 short, front-loaded with the main purpose, and uses a clear Args structure. Every sentence provides essential information with no wasted words.

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 straightforward list tool, the description covers the main points: pagination, max size, and required parameters. No output schema is present, but the return value is implied to be a list of items. The description is complete enough given the tool's simplicity.

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 100%, with all three parameters having descriptions in the schema. The description repeats parameter info in a structured format, adding defaults and constraints but not providing novel meaning beyond what the schema already offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 returns a paginated list of saved items for a company, specifying the verb (returns), resource (list of saved items), and constraints (max 200 per request). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that get a single item or filter by SKU.

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 that this tool is for retrieving a list of items for a company, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like machship_get_item, machship_get_items_by_skus, or others. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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