list_replies

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions an optional filter, not return format, pagination, ordering, or read-only safety. 'List' implies read-only but does not explicitly state it, leaving significant unknowns.

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 single, concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then mentions the optional filter. Every word earns its place, with no redundant 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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain return values and usage context, but it does not. It only states the basic action and one filter, leaving the agent without enough information to anticipate the response shape or behavior, making it incomplete for a non-trivial tool.

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 50%: the 'since' parameter has a description in the schema, and the tool description repeats that it is an ISO-8601 date filter, adding no new meaning. The 'limit' parameter has no description in schema or tool, although its default and max are present. The description does not compensate for the gap.

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 states the verb 'List' and the resource 'prospects who replied to outreach', which is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like list_prospects and search_prospects. It is unambiguous about what the tool does.

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 usage (for listing prospects who replied) but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like list_prospects or search_prospects. There are no exclusions or alternative references, so guidance is only implied.

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