List your Venmo friends with an optional limit to control the number returned.
List your Venmo friends.
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": "venmo_get_friends"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Maximum number of friends to return. Defaults to 50. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'List your Venmo friends' without mentioning authentication, pagination, the impact of the limit parameter, or the return structure. This leaves the agent under-informed about the tool's runtime behavior.
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 concise sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately sized for a simple list operation, making it easy to parse.
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 tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema, but the description lacks any detail about the response format or behavioral nuances like pagination. While the schema covers the limit default, the description could still benefit from a brief note on what the return value contains.
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 description does not mention the limit parameter, but the input schema provides complete documentation (including the default of 50). Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds little beyond the schema, which is acceptable but not value-adding.
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 the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'your Venmo friends,' which clearly communicates the core function. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like search_users or add_friend, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as using search_users to find new people or get_transactions for activity. There is no mention of exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer from the name and sibling context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.