clm_list_shipments

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

The annotations already establish readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds important behavioral scope: results are limited to the site and the caller's team visibility. It also signals listing behavior beyond the bare 'List shipments'.

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 front-loaded sentence communicates the operation, use case, capabilities, and scope with no filler. Every clause adds information.

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 read-only paginated list with an output schema and rich parameter descriptions, the description covers the key context: cockpit list usage, site/team scoping, and listing capabilities. It does not explicitly route to related list/search siblings, which is a minor contextual gap.

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 input schema already documents all nine parameters, including defaults, bounds, and format. The description restates the general filtering, sorting, and paging concepts but does not add parameter-level detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline.

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 concrete verb and resource ('List shipments') and adds the cockpit list view context plus the key capabilities: filtered, searched, ordered, and paged, scoped to site and team visibility. This is specific enough for an agent to understand what the tool does and to distinguish it from single-shipment detail tools.

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?

It explicitly ties the tool to the cockpit list view, giving a clear when-to-use context. It stops short of naming alternatives such as clm_search_shipments or clm_count_shipments, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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