List fax transmissions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known. The description adds useful behavioral scope (inbound and outbound, included fields), but does not disclose any additional constraints such as pagination, sorting, or result limits. This is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences with no fluff. The core action and scope are front-loaded, and the user-guidance sentence adds value without padding. Every word contributes.

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 parameterless list operation, the description covers the main purpose and even states the output fields (id, contact, status, direction). There is no output schema, so this field enumeration is valuable. The only minor gap is not explaining any possible pagination or size limits, but this is not critical given the tool's simplicity.

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 zero parameters and 100% schema description coverage, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for no parameters is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: "List fax transmissions on the server (inbound and outbound)" and details the returned fields (id, contact, status, direction). It also differentiates from the sibling tool by saying "Start here to find a transmission id," which positions this tool as the list/entry-point against ictfax_get_fax_status.

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 phrase "Start here to find a transmission id" gives clear situational context for using this tool to obtain an ID, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer the sibling tool ictfax_get_fax_status or provide exclusion criteria. Usage guidance is implied rather than fully detailed.

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