List Support Requests

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It fails to mention that the operation is read-only, lacks details on pagination limits beyond schema, and does not note any side effects or rate limits.

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 sentence with no redundant words. However, it could be more precise by matching the schema's parameter names exactly.

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 lacks an output schema, so the description should explain the response format, but it does not. Additionally, no mention of sorting or ordering is provided, leaving the agent with incomplete information for a listing endpoint.

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?

Despite 100% schema coverage, the description only rephrases filter options ('status' and 'category') without adding new meaning. The schema already documents parameters thoroughly, and the description's use of 'category' instead of 'categories_in' is slightly misleading.

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 tool lists support requests with optional pagination and filters, which distinguishes it from single-request retrieval tools like 'get_support_request'. However, the filter description uses 'category' while the schema uses 'categories_in', causing slight imprecision.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_support_request' for a single request or 'support_request_reply' for replying. The agent is left to infer usage context without explicit when-not-to-use advice.

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