wealthbox.opportunities.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior, but it only states 'List opportunities' and enumerates query parameters. It does not mention return format, pagination behavior, defaults, or any side effects; the absence of an output schema makes this gap more significant.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, with a single clear sentence followed by a compact parameter list. Every word serves a purpose and there is 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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the tool returns and any pagination or filtering nuances. It only lists parameter names, leaving the agent without information on response structure or default behavior, which is inadequate for a list endpoint with many filters.

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?

The schema has no descriptions, but the description enumerates all query parameter names, which helps the agent know what filters are available. However, it adds no meaning beyond the names already visible in the schema, leaving formats and semantics (e.g., date strings) unexplained.

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 begins with 'List opportunities,' using a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like opportunities.get, create, update, and delete.

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 verb 'List' and the list of query parameters imply this tool is for querying multiple opportunities with optional filters. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over opportunities.get or any other alternative.

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