list_envelopes

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral transparency. It explains the filtering options and return format, but omits details like pagination, ordering, or whether the result is scoped to the authenticated user. It does, however, accurately convey the read-only listing nature.

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 appropriately sized and well-structured: a one-line intro, an Args section, and a Returns section. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repetition.

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 relatively simple with three optional parameters and an output schema. The description adequately covers parameters and return shape. It lacks usage context and behavioral details like pagination, but the output schema reduces the burden for return value explanation.

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%, so the description compensates by explaining each parameter: from_date and to_date get ISO 8601 format examples, and status provides sample values. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it stops short of discussing how filters combine.

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's function: 'List envelopes with optional filters.' It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('envelopes'), which is distinct from sibling tools like list_envelope_documents and get_envelope_status.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'optional filters' but does not explain the specific use case or contrast with sibling tools like get_envelope_status or list_envelope_documents.

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