Listing Bureau - Amazon Organic Ranking

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable behavioral context: it confirms pagination behavior and specifically warns about legacy entries exceeding per_page count on the last page—a critical edge case for consumption logic.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste: first establishes purpose and pagination, second delivers a specific behavioral warning about legacy entries. Front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Adequate for a read-only list operation with optional pagination parameters. The description covers the primary behavioral quirk (legacy entries), and with readOnlyHint annotated and high schema coverage, no significant gaps remain despite missing output schema.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the parameters are fully documented in the schema itself. The description mentions 'paginated' which contextually supports the parameters but adds no specific semantic details beyond the schema definitions.

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 specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'Listing Bureau wallet transaction history', and distinguishes itself from siblings like lb_wallet_get_balance and lb_wallet_topup through the 'transaction history' scope.

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 'paginated' keyword and note about 'Last page may include legacy entries' provide implicit usage guidance for handling large datasets, but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or differentiation from lb_wallet_get_balance.

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