Baselinker List Methods

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the filter behavior (substring match on method name or category) and the output contents. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe potential limits, but 'List' conveys safety and the output schema covers return structure.

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 exactly two sentences with no redundancy. The primary purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence adds the only parameter detail needed. Every word earns its place.

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 single-optional-parameter listing tool, the description covers what is returned and how to filter. The only gap is the lack of explicit guidance on how this tool relates to baselinker_call, though the sibling list provides that context. The output schema handles the return structure, so nothing else is missing.

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?

The schema provides only a type and default for `filter` with zero description coverage. The tool description fully compensates by explaining that the filter matches a substring of the method name or category and supplies concrete examples ('order', 'inventory', 'courier'). This adds essential meaning beyond the raw schema.

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') and resource ('available BaseLinker API methods'), and itemizes the returned fields (name, category, description, common params). This makes it immediately distinguishable from its sibling baselinker_call, which executes a method rather than enumerating them.

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 usage by explaining how to use the filter, but it never explicitly states when to choose this tool over baselinker_call. The sibling relationship makes the intended discovery-then-call workflow inferable, but no explicit when/when-not guidance is provided.

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