dossier_list

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

Annotations already provide read-only and idempotent hints. The description adds that it returns a paginated list with specific fields, adding context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 to three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds value: purpose, use case, requirements, and return structure.

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 no output schema, the description helpfully lists return fields. However, it lacks explanation of pagination, sorting, and filtering parameters, leaving gaps for a tool with nested objects and many options.

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%. The description only mentions caseFileId as required and mentions return fields, but does not explain parameters like page, order, or filter, which are complex and nested.

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 all dossiers in a case file with status and metadata, and distinguishes it from siblings like dossier_get (single dossier) by specifying it's for finding dossierId or monitoring progress.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (find dossierId, monitor certification) and requires caseFileId. Does not mention when not to use, but implicit differentiation from dossier_get and other dossier tools.

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