List new support tickets

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is disclosed. The description adds value beyond annotations by explaining the 'effective status' nuance and the 'oldest first' ordering, which provides useful behavioral context not present in the schema or 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?

One concise sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the primary action and includes the key filter and ordering, making it highly scannable.

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 an output schema, one optional parameter, and read-only annotations, the description provides all necessary context: what it lists, the filter, and the ordering. No critical gaps remain.

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% for the single parameter (limit), and the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already states. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema carries the full semantic weight.

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 ('List'), resource ('tickets'), a precise filter ('effective status is Новая'), and ordering ('oldest first'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like tickets_get (which likely retrieves a single ticket) and mutation tools like tickets_change_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 description clearly implies when to use this tool (when you need a list of new tickets), but it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it. The context is inferred from the description and sibling tool names, and there is no exclusion guidance.

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