feegow_list_proposals

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

No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, permissions, or side effects. It only states the HTTP method, leaving much unknown.

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 concise (single line) but lacks structure. It contains essential info but could be more organized with bullet points or sections.

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 5 parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return format, pagination, or how the query parameter is used.

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 80%, with most parameters described. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond mentioning period/patient filtering; it does not explain tipo_data or the query parameter structure.

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 the tool lists proposals by period or patient, with the HTTP endpoint. It provides a specific verb and resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like feegow_list_proposals_by_date.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., feegow_list_proposals_by_date). The description only mentions filtering by period/paciente, but lacks context on appropriate scenarios.

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