List Matches

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions two modes but does not disclose behavior like whether parameters are mutually exclusive, pagination limits, or whether the operation is read-only. Minimal behavioral insight.

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, which is concise but lacks structure. It does not break down the two modes or hint at the many parameters. Could be more organized without adding length.

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 17 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far from complete. It does not explain the two modes in sufficient detail, nor how parameters work together for effective use.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must compensate. It only mentions 'by date and filters' and 'Taso text search mode', but does not explain any of the 17 parameters or how they interact. Very little meaning added beyond parameter names.

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 it lists matches with date/filter or text search mode. The verb 'list' and resource 'matches' are explicit. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_match', though the purpose is distinct enough from context.

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 when to use (listing matches with filters), but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use (e.g., for single match retrieval use get_match) or alternatives. No exclusions or context provided.

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