List buckslips

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint false). It explains the counting trick and filtering capabilities. It does not contradict annotations and provides practical usage details. Could mention pagination defaults.

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?

Two sentences, to the point. Essential information is front-loaded. Uses bold for emphasis. No redundant or extraneous text.

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?

Without an output schema, the description could hint at the return structure (e.g., paginated list). It mentions filters and counting but omits details about pagination defaults or expected response shape. Adequate but leaves some contextual gaps.

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 enhances parameter understanding by explaining the interplay between include and limit for counting, and re-emphasizing filters. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 lists buckslip inventory on the account, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, get, or orders. It specifies the resource (buckslips) and the action (list), with no ambiguity.

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 explicitly advises when to use the total_count parameter with limit:1 for counting, which is a valuable usage guideline. It also mentions filtering by date_created or metadata. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives, though no direct alternatives exist for listing inventory.

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