list_buy_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly indicates the tool is read-only (listing) and requires authentication. It also specifies the output contains quantities, finish, and current prices. No undisclosed side effects or destructive behavior is implied. Minor omission: it does not mention if the list is paginated or limited, but given zero parameters, it is likely a full list, which is acceptable.

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 that covers purpose, output details, and authentication requirement. Every word is informative without redundancy. The structure is efficient and front-loaded with the core action.

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 adequately describes the return contents (quantities, finish, prices). It also mentions the authentication requirement. For a simple list operation with no parameters, this is sufficiently complete. It could optionally mention that it returns the entire list for the authenticated user, but the current text implies that. No major gaps.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100% by default. The description does not need to add parameter details since none exist. According to guidelines, baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description meets this without needing to explain missing parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool lists the authenticated user's buy-list with specific items (quantities, finish, prices). The verb 'list' combined with the resource 'buy-list' makes the purpose unambiguous. The description also distinguishes from siblings like add_buy_list or remove_buy_list which modify the list.

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 context for when to use the tool: to view the user's own buy-list. It states a prerequisite (requires IWMM_API_KEY). However, it does not explicitly contrast with other 'list' tools such as list_inventory or list_decks, though the name largely disambiguates. Slight improvement could include a note on when not to use it, but the implied usage is clear.

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