bokio_list_journal_entries

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that results are paged and filterable, but says nothing about result ordering, default page size, or whether 'query' interacts with or overrides 'from'/'to' — a meaningful ambiguity for a filtered list.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary capability and followed by a single routing pointer. No filler, nothing repeated from the schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the six parameters are fully documented in the schema. What remains missing for a paged list tool is ordering and default page size, plus the exact interaction between query and date bounds.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are documented in the schema, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds only that from/to are optional and that query is a 'raw' filter, and the phrasing 'between from and to or narrowed by a raw query filter' hints at an either/or relationship that the schema itself does not state, but it never clarifies it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List journal entries') and includes the Swedish domain term 'verifikationer', which helps disambiguate for users of the Bokio UI. It routes away from bokio_account_ledger, though it does not explicitly contrast with bokio_get_journal_entry.

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?

Gives clear usage context (paging, date range, raw filter) and names an explicit alternative for the account-postings case: 'For the postings on one account use bokio_account_ledger.' No explicit when-not conditions beyond that, and no mention of when to prefer bokio_get_journal_entry for a single entry.

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