list_wanted_cutoff

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only 'Read Cutoff' and the HTTP endpoint, which restates the resource. It does not disclose return behavior, pagination characteristics, or any side effects beyond what annotations already provide.

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 structure is clean and front-loaded with the verb and endpoint, but it wastes space by repeating 'Query parameter' eight times, which is redundant. It is concise yet could say more with less 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?

For a tool with 8 parameters and no param documentation in the description, it is incomplete. It does not explain what the cutoff list represents, how parameters alter output, or how it relates to sibling tools. The output schema exists, which reduces the burden, but the core semantics are still missing.

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 the description must compensate by explaining parameter meaning. Instead, it merely repeats the parameter names and labels each as 'Query parameter,' which adds no semantic value beyond the schema. There is no explanation of how these parameters affect results.

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 says 'Read Cutoff,' which identifies a verb and a resource but remains vague. It does not state that this lists wanted cutoff episodes, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools like list_wanted_missing or get_wanted_cutoff_by_id. An agent would need domain knowledge to infer the exact purpose.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of conditions, exclusions, or relations to siblings. The description simply lists arguments, leaving usage entirely to inference.

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