ezd_koszulka_list

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is established. The description adds that results are paginated and filterable, which is useful, but it does not disclose defaults, response shape, or any side effects; with the annotation covering safety, this level is acceptable.

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 one short sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, with no wasted words. It is concise, though it could earn a higher score by adding a brief note on search alternatives or default behavior.

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 eight optional parameters, no output schema, and a large sibling set, the description provides only the basic list-with-pagination/filters premise. It does not explain the return format, pagination defaults, or distinctions from ezd_koszulka_search; nevertheless, the rich schema and readOnly annotation cover much of the operational context.

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 all eight parameters are already documented with meaningful descriptions, including default behavior for owner IDs. The description only repeats the generic notion of pagination and filters without adding parameter-specific meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific action ('Pobierz liste' = get list) and resource ('koszulek z systemu EZD PUW'), so the core purpose is clear. However, it does not differentiate this list operation from the sibling ezd_koszulka_search or ezd_koszulka_list_documents, so uniqueness is not fully established.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are several similar listing/search tools among siblings, but the description provides no selection criteria, exclusions, or context such as 'use this for all koszulki, use search for queries'.

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