get_offers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination, status buckets, per-currency net totals, and that each offer shows invoice count. It could mention authorization or rate limits, but for a read-only listing tool, this is good transparency.

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, front-loaded with core functionality, no wasted words. Every sentence provides useful information.

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 11 parameters (all described), no output schema, and sibling context, the description covers filtering, pagination, statuses, search, and per-currency totals. It could explicitly state it returns a list of offers, but it's implied.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining search behavior ('match number, order number, subject and recipient address') and that sum_min/sum_max are in major currency units, going beyond 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 starts with 'List offers (quotes) with filters and per-currency net totals; paginated,' which clearly states the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from siblings like get_invoices and get_orders by specifying 'offers (quotes)' and the specific status buckets.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_invoices or get_orders. It implies usage for filtering and listing offers but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it.

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