Retrieve a list of all contracts associated with your BeezUP account.
Get contract list
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "GetContracts"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Get contract list', implying a read-only operation, but does not mention pagination, filtering, data scope (e.g., all contracts or user-specific), or any side effects. This is insufficient for safe tool invocation.
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?
At 3 words, the description is extremely concise. It front-loads the core action and resource. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity, earning a 4 rather than 5.
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?
With no output schema and minimal description, the agent lacks context about the returned data structure, pagination, or filtering. Given no parameters, the tool's behavior is underdocumented, making it hard for an agent to use correctly.
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 input schema has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). According to guidelines, zero parameters yield a baseline of 4. The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, but none is needed.
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 'Get contract list' is a clear verb+resource indicating retrieval of a list of contracts. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'GetOffer' or 'GetStandardOffers', which may overlap in purpose.
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?
No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives, such as 'GetOffer' or 'GetStandardOffers'. With numerous sibling tools, this lack of guidance forces the agent to guess.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.