list_transactions

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

The description adds significant behavioral details beyond annotations: pagination by row ID with inclusive/exclusive bounds, API cap of 1000 rows per window, and credential requirements. There is no contradiction with the readOnlyHint and other annotations.

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 a single paragraph with three sentences, each serving a purpose: stating the main function, explaining pagination mechanics, and suggesting usage. No redundant information.

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?

The description covers the core behavior, pagination constraints, and use cases. With an output schema assumed to exist, the description sufficiently prepares an agent for correct invocation without needing further external knowledge.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining inclusivity/exclusivity of rows, the API cap, and default values. It also clarifies account_id as a numeric string from get_balances.

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 it lists ledger entries for a single account on the authenticated profile, paginated by row ID. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_orders or list_trades which target different resources.

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 provides explicit use cases: reconciliation, exports, or audit trails. It also explains the pagination iteration pattern. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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