List envelopes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the description's main behavioral contribution is the honest caveat that the API does not document sort order and its example lists newest first. It also discloses what fields are included in results. This adds useful context beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 sentences with no filler, and the key action and scope are front-loaded. The sort-order parenthetical is slightly convoluted but earns its place because it prevents an incorrect assumption about ordering.

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 read-only list tool with fully documented parameters, the description covers the main return fields, filter behavior, and ordering caveat. No output schema exists, so it could enumerate more fields, but an agent has enough to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 parameters are already well documented. The description adds only the combined filter logic ('one status and/or a keyword in the title'), which is mildly useful but not a significant extension over the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('List envelopes on this Signable account') and adds the returned fields (status, timestamps, parties' names). This clearly distinguishes it from single-envelope or template/contact siblings, even though it does not name them.

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 clear context: this is an account-level envelope listing with optional filtering by status and/or title keyword. It does not explicitly state when to prefer get_contact_envelopes or get_envelope, but the scope and filters imply the intended use.

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