ksef_draft_list

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates this operation is read-only, and the description is consistent with that by using 'Wyświetl' (display). It adds useful behavioral context that the list includes all drafts and status filtering is optional, which aligns with the annotation and clarifies the scope of the operation.

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 a concise two-sentence Polish definition with no redundant wording. It front-loads the main purpose and then mentions the optional filter, which is efficient for a simple list tool.

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 simple read-only list operation with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate: it communicates the operation, the resource, and the filter. It does not detail pagination, ordering, or response details, but these are less critical for a straightforward list tool and no output schema is present to contradict.

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?

The input schema already documents the 'status' parameter with a full enum and a description, so schema coverage is 100%. The description only adds the fact that filtering is optional, which is a minor clarification; the parameter's meaning is already well-defined in 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 states a specific verb ('Wyświetl listę') and resource ('wszystkich draftów faktur'), making clear that this tool lists invoice drafts. It mentions optional filtering by status, which helps distinguish it from other draft-related tools, though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 a list/query use case through 'Wyświetl listę' and notes the sole optional filter, giving the agent a sense of when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to an alternative like ksef_draft_get for fetching a single draft.

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