list_outgoing_transfers

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

With no annotations, the description discloses that the tool performs a GET list operation (read-only) and mentions that each entry includes a 'preview_path' for deep-linking. It does not contradict any annotations and provides reasonable behavioral context, though an explicit safety statement would improve clarity.

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 concise with two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second adds valuable details about preview_path and the endpoint. No extraneous information, and the main action is front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description should clarify the response format and pagination behavior. It only mentions that entries have a 'preview_path' but does not state that the response is a list, that it may be empty, or how pagination works via 'after'. This leaves gaps for an AI agent.

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 100% and both parameters ('limit' and 'after') have descriptions in the input schema. The description does not add extra semantic details beyond what the schema already provides, so a 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'pending project transfers' with the specific scope 'INITIATED BY the authenticated wallet'. It also references the endpoint and provides a differentiator from sibling 'list_incoming_transfers' by specifying 'outgoing' and the initiating party.

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 for transfers initiated by the authenticated wallet but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_incoming_transfers'. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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