passgage_list_user_rates

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation, and mentioning filtering and pagination adds some context. However, it does not disclose response format, authorization requirements, or any potential quirks, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word is meaningful, with no fluff or repetition.

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 does not explain what the response contains or its structure. It covers the core action but lacks detail on return format, filter capabilities, or pagination behavior, making it adequate but not fully complete for a tool with nested objects and no output schema.

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 schema already fully explains page, filters, and per_page. The description mentions filtering and pagination but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'user_rates', making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It also mentions optional filtering and pagination, which distinguishes it from other user_rate tools like get_user_rate, create_user_rate, etc.

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 the tool is for retrieving multiple user_rate records, but it does not explicitly specify when to use this versus get_user_rate for a single record. There is no exclusions or alternatives mentioned, so usage is implied rather than explicit.

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