gambot_list_casesList CRM cases with pagination and search. Specify page number and size to retrieve specific subsets of case records for efficient data management.
List cases (paginated).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| search | No | ||
| pageSize | No | ||
| pageNumber | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It only discloses that results are paginated; it does not mention ordering, defaults, what search filters against, or whether this is a read-only 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 three words and every word earns its place. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or repetition.
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?
The description is too sparse for a tool with three parameters and no output schema. It omits pagination defaults, the semantics of the search parameter, and any indication of what the response contains.
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% and the description adds no meaning to any parameter. 'search' remains ambiguous, and pageSize/pageNumber are only self-explanatory by their names, not by the description.
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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('cases'), making the core action clear. It also notes pagination, which distinguishes it from the singular gambot_get_case, though it does not explicitly contrast with any sibling.
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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gambot_get_case or gambot_list_leads. Usage context is only implied by the name and title, not actually stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.