Triage — Unapproved

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral detail beyond that: the default ordering and the notable rule that 'count always describes the whole queue' rather than the current page.

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 with no waste, front-loaded with the read tag, the resource, and the ordering before moving to pagination semantics. Every sentence carries 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained; the description appropriately covers ordering and pagination/count semantics instead. The only real gap is the unexplained plan_id parameter.

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%, so the description carries the burden. It does explain that limit and offset paginate the result, which is helpful, but it never mentions plan_id, leaving one of three parameters entirely undocumented in both the schema and 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all unapproved transactions') plus the default ordering ('most-recent first'), which is more than the title provides. It is distinguishable from the other triage_* siblings by its resource scope, though it does not explicitly name a contrasting 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 sentence about imported bank transactions typically starting as unapproved gives useful implied context for when this queue matters, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternative guidance and no mention of the sibling tools (triage_pending_imports, triage_uncategorized, etc.) that an agent must choose between.

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