List your transactions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the GLONGUS_API_KEY auth requirement, the full state lifecycle, and the fact that each record carries a buyer/seller role.

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?

Three short sentences, no repetition: identity/scope first, then the state vocabulary, then the auth requirement. Every sentence carries distinct information.

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?

With one optional param, a read-only annotation, and no output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: what it returns (both roles, each tagged), the state vocabulary, and the auth prerequisite. It stops short of clarifying ordering or pagination, but nothing critical is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes beyond the schema's lone 'e.g. escrow_held' by enumerating the full set of valid states (escrow_held → dispatched → in_transit → delivered → completed, or cancelled / dispute_raised), making the state filter actually usable.

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?

States the specific resource (sales and purchases, i.e. transactions) and clarifies the scope: post-deal-close, both buyer and seller roles. That clearly separates it from listing-marketplace tools like search_listings and from list_offers, though it never names get_transaction as the single-record 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 'after a deal closes' framing implies when this applies and the state values hint at filtering, but there is no explicit 'use this when / not when' guidance and no pointer to siblings such as get_transaction for a single record or the state-specific action tools like mark_dispatched.

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