List receipts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses cursor pagination, mutation constraints (no update/delete), error handling (400 verbatim), and field naming convention. It does not mention output structure or rate limits, but provides substantial behavioral context.

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?

Five sentences, each informative, with purpose front-loaded. No wasted words and no redundancy.

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 4 parameters fully described, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers pagination, mutation constraints, error handling, and field naming. It lacks a summary of the response structure (e.g., pagination metadata), but is largely complete for a listing tool.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value beyond schema descriptions, such as explaining pagination support and error handling. The query parameter description in schema is generic; the description could include typical filters but does not.

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 'List receipts from Loyverse (GET /receipts)', providing a specific verb and resource. It uniquely identifies the tool among siblings, which are all for different resources.

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 implies usage through the operation name, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions that receipts cannot be updated or deleted, hinting at limitations, but lacks direct guidance on when to choose this over other list tools.

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