geck_transaction_list

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

The verb 'list' and the ordering 'newest first' convey a read-only, sorted listing, which is useful behavioral signal in the absence of annotations. However, 'recent' is unexplained, and no detail is provided about filesystem access, filtering behavior, or interaction with the current transaction lifecycle.

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 compact sentence with no redundancy, and the core action, resource, and ordering are front-loaded. It is concise, though it sacrifices useful context by being so terse.

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?

Even though an output schema exists and all parameters are optional, the missing parameter semantics and lack of usage context make the description incomplete for non-default invocations. An agent cannot determine when to set plugin_name or game_dir, or how 'recent' is bounded.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the tool description mentions none of the three parameters. An agent cannot tell from the description how limit, game_dir, or plugin_name affect the result; only bare property titles and defaults are available.

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 states a clear verb ('List') plus a specific resource ('recent MCP backup/transaction files') and an ordering constraint ('newest first'). It is reasonably distinct from sibling tools like listing plugins, though the phrase 'backup/transaction files' is slightly ambiguous.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus related siblings such as geck_transaction_verify, geck_transaction_rollback, geck_backup_plugin, or geck_list_plugins. The description only says what the tool does, not when it should be selected.

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