get_tickets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It reveals pagination behavior and parameter constraints (page starts at 1, per_page max 100). However, it does not mention potential prerequisites, rate limits, or characteristics of the returned data (e.g., ordering, status inclusion), leaving some behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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 two short sentences followed by a clean args list. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and contains no filler or 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?

For a simple list tool with two optional integer parameters and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It covers purpose and pagination constraints. However, without annotations, a bit more context about behavior (e.g., "all tickets" including closed ones) would make it fully complete.

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 adds crucial meaning to both parameters: page starts at 1 and per_page has a maximum of 100. Since the input schema only provides types and defaults with no descriptions, and schema description coverage is 0%, this fully compensates for the schema's lack of semantic detail.

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" with resource "tickets" and explicitly states "all tickets", clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_ticket_by_id (single ticket) and filter_tickets (filtered query).

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 phrase "List all tickets" provides clear context that this tool fetches the full set of tickets without filtering. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over filter_tickets or get_ticket_by_id, so it lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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