ezd_api3_list_cases

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

Annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation. The description adds that this is a list retrieveal from EZD PUW with filters, but does not disclose pagination, result ordering, or default ownership behavior beyond what the schema already notes.

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 short, front-loaded sentences: the first states the action, the second lists filters. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant filler.

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 all-optional parameters and no output schema, the description gives the core purpose and filter surface. It is slightly incomplete because it does not mention pagination or explicitly route an agent toward a single-case tool when a specific case is needed.

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 schema already documents all seven parameters. The description adds a concise natural-language mapping of the main filters (Wlasne, IdJednostki, Rocznik, SymbolRWA), but this adds only lightweight meaning beyond the existing param descriptions.

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 specifies a concrete action ('Pobierz liste spraw'), a resource ('z EZD PUW'), and the main filter dimensions. This clearly distinguishes the list operation from sibling tools like ezd_api3_get_case or ezd_api3_register_case.

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 implies usage by saying this tool lists cases and filters by own cases, unit, year, or RWA symbol, but it does not state when to prefer this over alternatives such as ezd_api3_get_case or ezd_koszulka_list.

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