List Actions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so excellently. It discloses the state behavior (including reversed/test orders), the distinction between event-date and last-modified date filters, the 45-day max range, the 7-day default, and the lack of pagination. This is substantial behavioral disclosure beyond typical descriptions.

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 concise and well-structured, with four sentences that each add critical details without redundancy. It front-loads the purpose and then packs in behavioral facts efficiently.

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 the tool has 6 optional parameters and no output schema, this description covers all essential usage aspects: state filtering, two date ranges, range limits, defaults, and pagination absence. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly without needing additional information.

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 description significantly enriches the schema by explaining the semantics of the state parameter (omit to scan all three), clarifying that ActionDateStart/End relate to event dates while StartDate/End relate to last-modified, and adding constraints like the 45-day max and default 7-day window. This goes well beyond what the schema descriptions alone provide.

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 identifies the tool as listing actions (conversions/commissions), and the distinction from sibling tools like get_action or find_action_by_order is clear due to the focus on listing multiple actions. The scope is further clarified by the state-scanning behavior.

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 useful context on when to use this tool, such as the default scanning of all states and the different date filter types. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for single-action retrieval or order-based search, but it does note the absence of pagination, which helps set expectations.

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