list_quotations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination but does not describe default behavior for pagination (page/limit), result ordering, whether total count is returned, or that it is a read-only operation. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what the input schema already indicates.

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 a single sentence that efficiently enumerates the core filter categories. It is concise and front-loaded, though it could benefit from clarifying the order or grouping of parameters.

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 12 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain pagination details, return structure, or how filters combine. Agents would need to infer behavior, which increases risk of misuse.

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 only 42%, leaving many parameters (customer_id, company_name, quotation_for, etc.) undocumented. The tool description only generically lists filter types without explaining each parameter's meaning or expected format, failing to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 action 'Ambil daftar' (get list) and the resource 'manage quotation' with explicit filter options (status, island, customer, date range, search, pagination). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_quotation' (single record) and 'create_quotation', making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 lists available filters but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'get_quotation' for a single item). Usage context is implied by the tool name and filter options, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice is given.

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