List tips

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds channel-scoping and filterable-by-date/tipper/email/message context, but no additional behavioral traits such as pagination, auth requirements, or rate limits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no redundant text. Every clause earns its place by stating the resource and main filter categories.

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 10-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is thin: it omits sorting, pagination, timezone, and channel-default behavior, and does not describe the returned tip shape. The rich schema compensates somewhat, but the description alone leaves meaningful 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all 10 parameters are already documented. The description names date-range, tipper, email, and message filters but adds no syntax, defaults, or handling details beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb 'List' and resource 'channel's tips (donations)' with filter scope, clearly distinguishing it from aggregate siblings like tips_top/leaderboard or single-tip tips_get. However, it does not explicitly name or exclude any sibling tool.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. It only states that optional filters exist, without saying when to choose this tool over tips_top, tips_leaderboard, tips_moderation_list, or tips_get.

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