get_all_transfers

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions pagination but fails to disclose other behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, default ordering, or what happens when the subscription has no transfers. Adequate but not thorough.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary purpose. However, it could be slightly restructured to separate the pagination detail without harming conciseness.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It lacks explanation of default fields, common filter patterns, or the structure of a transfer object, leaving the agent underinformed for effective 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?

All 6 parameters are described in the input schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no new parameter-level meaning. The baseline 3 is appropriate; no extra context like parameter interdependencies or formatting rules is provided.

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 ('Get'), the resource ('transfers'), and the scope ('within your subscription') with pagination hint. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_transfer_by_id or get_transfers_by_date_range by implying it retrieves all transfers for the user's subscription.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternative transfer tools (e.g., get_transfers_by_team_id). The description does not specify scenarios where a filtered approach might be better, nor does it mention any prerequisites or limitations.

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