Send List

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

The description explicitly states it is read-only and does not mutate the vault, aligning with annotations (readOnlyHint: true). No additional behavioral traits are needed since the tool is simple and has no side effects.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, front-loading the core purpose and adding a critical behavioral note. Every word is valuable.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does. It specifies the resource (Sends), ownership (owned by you), and the nature of the operation (list, read-only). No additional information is necessary.

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?

The input schema has no parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description simply confirms the operation, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 'List all the Sends owned by you' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like keychain_send_get or keychain_send_create by emphasizing read-only behavior and no mutation.

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 implicitly indicates when to use the tool (to list all Sends) and contrasts with mutating siblings by stating it is read-only. While not explicitly listing alternatives, the context is clear enough for an AI agent.

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