list_shipments

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the operation and status values. It doesn't mention that listing is read-only, pagination behavior, default limits, or authentication requirements. This is a significant gap for a tool with zero annotation support.

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 exactly two sentences, with the primary purpose in the first sentence and the status legend in the second. There is zero fluff or repetition, making it extremely concise and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should provide more context. It covers the status parameter adequately but omits details on pagination, filtering, return format, and operational behavior. It's minimally adequate but leaves clear gaps for a smooth invocation.

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 crucial meaning for the 'status' parameter by mapping numeric codes to statuses, which the schema completely lacks. However, it does nothing to explain 'page', 'limit', 'sqlfilters', or 'thirdparty_id'. With schema description coverage at 0%, this is only a partial compensation, leaving several parameters underspecified.

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 action ('Lister') and the resource ('les expéditions/bons de livraison'), making it unambiguous. It also provides a status code legend, which adds specific scope and distinguishes the list operation from singular get_shipment or creating 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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_shipment for a single shipment. It doesn't mention prerequisites, filtering use cases beyond status, or any exclusions. The status codes hint at filtering but don't qualify as usage guidance.

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