list_thirdparties

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It mentions filtering and pagination, and the verb 'Lister' implies a read-only action, but it does not explicitly state read-only, return format, or default behavior beyond schema. Some gaps remain.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by capability highlights. Every word earns its place without redundancy.

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 6-parameter tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately explains the core listing/searching behavior and key features. It omits explicit return shape details and guidance versus get_thirdparty, but it is largely sufficient.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level note about name search and SQL filters but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already documents for each parameter.

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 lists and searches Dolibarr third parties (customers, prospects, suppliers). The verb 'Lister et rechercher' plus the resource and type enumeration makes it distinct from sibling tools like get_thirdparty.

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?

It provides clear context by mentioning search by name, SQL filters, and pagination, which indicates when it is useful. However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for a single third party, use get_thirdparty).

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