Send List

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

The description states 'This is read-only and does not mutate the vault', which aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation but adds no new behavioral context beyond what the annotation already provides. For a tool with annotations, the description adds minimal value.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence states the main purpose, and the second clarifies the read-only nature. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is adequate but lacks details about the output format, expected fields, or any limitations like pagination. It meets minimum viability but has gaps.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is effectively 100%. The description correctly omits parameter details. Per guidelines, baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 all Sends owned by the user, using the verb 'List' and specifying the resource 'Sends owned by you'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like keychain_send_get and keychain_send_create by focusing on listing all sends.

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 when a user wants to list all sends, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus other tools like keychain_send_get or keychain_list_collections. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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