List Keka PSA Clients

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the returned field set (ID, name, email, phone, status, creation date) and the downstream usage with keka_list_psa_projects, which is useful beyond the annotations.

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 compact and front-loads the core purpose, followed by parameters, return fields, and a next-step hint. The Args block partly duplicates the schema, but it serves as a quick reference and does not bloat the description.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool with three optional parameters, the description is complete: purpose, parameters, return fields, and downstream usage are all covered. The annotations handle safety, and the schema handles parameter details.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents pageNumber, pageSize, and response_format. The description repeats defaults and types but does not add semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve all clients from Keka's Professional Services Automation (PSA) module.' It clearly distinguishes this from general employee list tools by naming the PSA module and explicitly cross-referencing keka_list_psa_projects.

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 gives clear context: use this to get PSA clients, then use returned IDs with keka_list_psa_projects. It does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternative client-related tools, but the intended workflow is clear.

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