list_ledgers

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

No annotations are provided, and the description discloses no behavioral traits beyond the basic listing action. It does not mention pagination behavior, read-only nature, or any side effects, leaving the agent without insight into what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 very concise (three words), but it is overly terse and lacks structured information. It is front-loaded but fails to provide essential context, making it merely adequate.

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 lack of output schema and the presence of pagination parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, pagination behavior, or ordering, which is necessary for an agent to use it effectively.

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 100%, with both skip and limit well-documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning about parameters, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 'List all ledgers' is clear about the verb and resource, but the word 'all' is misleading because the input schema includes pagination parameters (skip, limit), implying it may not return all ledgers at once. It does not distinguish from sibling list tools beyond the resource name.

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 like list_invoices or list_payments. The description lacks context for usage scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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