elster_belege_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key trait ('Read-only') plus a summary of returned fields. It omits pagination behavior, result limits, and any auth/session prerequisites, which for a list tool with no annotations leaves meaningful gaps.

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 sentence with the verb and scope front-loaded and the field list appended; every clause earns its place and there is no padding.

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 with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description supplies the returned fields it would otherwise be missing. It could add pagination or scope notes, but nothing essential to invoking it correctly is absent.

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% and the single 'year' parameter is documented in the schema as 'Only receipts for this tax year.' The description adds no filter syntax or semantics beyond that, so the baseline of 3 is 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+resource: 'Lists receipts in Meine Belege' and enumerates the returned fields (id, label, year, Belegart, recognised values, status). It is clearly distinguishable from the write-side sibling elster_beleg_upload, but does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from the other list tools (submissions_list, drafts_list).

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?

Usage is implied by the resource ('Meine Belege' receipts, optional tax-year filter), so an agent can infer when it applies. However, there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no routing to sibling list tools, leaving the selection context to inference.

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