List transfers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of pagination behavior, result ordering, default page size, or whether results are scoped to the whole account, even though cursor parameters exist.

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 title phrase 'List transfers' is repeated as both the lead sentence and the first line of the description, wasting the opening slot. What remains is a single vague sentence about filters, so the definition is both redundant and under-loaded.

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?

It is a list tool with a nested created object, cursor pagination, and no output schema, yet the description says nothing about the return shape, ordering, or paging strategy. Given no output schema, the description should carry that burden and does not.

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 documents limit, status, created, and the cursor parameters in detail. The description merely restates that status and creation time can be filtered, adding no meaning beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('List transfers') but states it twice, and gives no differentiation from siblings such as get_transfer, list_transactions, or list_settlements. An agent can infer the resource but not the scope relative to the wider transfer-related family.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: no mention of when to prefer this over get_transfer, get_transfer_by_reference, or simulate_transfer, and no exclusions. The only hint is the filter sentence, which is an implied usage but not a selection rule.

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