list_earnings

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scoping fact that results are limited to the authenticated user's own earnings, but says nothing about pagination behavior, ordering, or result size.

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?

A single sentence with zero waste that front-loads the verb and resource and clarifies the key term in a parenthetical. Nothing redundant is included.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, the absence of any pagination guidance for two paging parameters and the lack of differentiation from get_balance/list_payouts leave real gaps for a tool an agent must select among siblings.

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 0%, so both page_size and page_number are undocumented in the schema, and the description does not compensate at all. It never mentions pagination, defaults, or max page size, leaving the agent to infer the meaning of both parameters.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (earnings), and usefully disambiguates the vague term 'earnings' as bounties, retests, and pentests, scoped to the authenticated hacker. It does not, however, differentiate itself from overlapping siblings such as get_balance or list_payouts.

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 on when to use this versus the closely related get_balance and list_payouts tools, which an agent must choose between. The scope note ('authenticated hacker') is the only context offered; there are no exclusions or conditions.

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