rsap_list_bars

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the listing action and return fields, but does not disclose default behavior (e.g., limit=500 applies by default), pagination, ordering, or any side effects. Without annotations, this is a significant gap for a read operation.

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, with one clear sentence followed by a brief parameter explanation. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no unnecessary words 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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter) and no output schema, the description provides the essential information: what the tool lists and what the parameter does. It could be more complete by noting the default limit or ordering behavior, but for a simple list operation it is adequate.

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 includes an explicit Args section explaining that 'limit' is the 'Maximum number of bars to return'. This adds clear meaning beyond the schema's type and default, fully compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'bars', and specifies the return content as 'start/end node numbers'. This distinguishes it from siblings like rsap_list_nodes and rsap_list_sections, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 (e.g., list_nodes, list_sections). It does not mention any exclusions or contexts where a different list tool would be preferred. The only implicit hint is the tool name itself, which is insufficient.

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