awb_list

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

No annotations provided, so description should disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'List,' which implies read-only, but does not explicitly state safety or lack of side effects. No mention of pagination behavior, limits, or data freshness.

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?

Description is concise and structured with a header and parameter list. Each sentence serves a purpose, though the parameter descriptions could be slightly consolidated.

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 a simple list tool with 5 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the necessary input semantics. Lacks details on error handling or pagination behavior, but output schema may compensate for return value documentation.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It provides clear one-line explanations for all 5 parameters (order_id, awb_number, carrier_id, page, limit), adding meaning beyond the schema's type and default.

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?

Description clearly states 'List AWB records' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like awb_create, awb_delete, etc., which are clearly different operations.

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 alternatives. No mention of scenarios where a different AWB tool would be preferable, e.g., awb_generate for creating new AWBs.

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