list_issues

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes a read operation ('List discrepancies'), but does not disclose side effects, return format, pagination, or limits. For a tool with no output schema, the description should provide more context about what data is returned.

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 sentence that communicates the tool's purpose, resource, and optional filter without any wasted words. It is concise and front-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?

Given the tool has only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers most essential information. However, it omits what the returned discrepancies look like (e.g., fields, format) and any pagination or ordering details, leaving some ambiguity. A more complete description would describe the output structure.

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 both parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, such as clarifying that the output is 'discrepancies' and that severity defaults to 'all'. It largely repeats the parameter information, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 tool lists discrepancies from a stored kiyas report by reportId, with optional severity filtering. It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('discrepancies from a stored kiyas report'), and implies the tool is used after a prior compare call, effectively distinguishing it from siblings like 'compare' and 'get_diff_report'.

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 provides context by mentioning 'stored kiyas report by reportId', indicating a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs. siblings (e.g., compare, get_diff_report) or provide any exclusion criteria. The usage is implied but not fully spelled out.

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