List my parcels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful behavioral context: statuses are kept up to date with public tracking, pickup codes are included when available, and filtering is case-insensitive. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and contains no redundant or filler content. Every sentence adds meaningful information about the tool's functionality and filtering capabilities.

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 read-only listing tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers what the tool returns, tracking freshness, and filter options. It could mention pagination or phone number filtering explicitly, but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to use it correctly.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra value by providing example status values, noting case insensitivity, and explaining the optional filter behavior. It does not repeat schema info verbatim and enhances understanding of the statuses parameter.

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 with a specific verb and resource: 'List your InPost parcels'. It also specifies the returned information (status, locker, pickup code) and distinguishes it from siblings like get_parcel, track, and list_returns by focusing on listing multiple parcels.

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 clear context: it lists parcels and allows optional status filtering. It does not explicitly state when to use this instead of alternatives like get_parcel or track, but the context is sufficient to infer typical use cases. Lacks explicit exclusions but gives a clear sense of purpose.

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