list_transactions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination behavior, or potential side effects. The description implies read-only via 'list', but an agent would benefit from explicit safety information.

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 front-loaded with purpose, followed by usage examples and then parameter documentation. Every sentence is valuable and concise with 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?

The description covers all parameters and usage context. Although it doesn't mention the return type (list of transactions), an output schema exists, so this is acceptable. Could be more complete by noting pagination via skip/take.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides detailed docstrings for each parameter (e.g., 'ISO date lower bound' for start_date), adding meaningful context beyond the input schema.

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 verb 'list' and resource 'payment transactions' with specific examples ('charges, credits, refunds'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_transaction or list_members.

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 gives explicit usage examples like 'show me yesterday's revenue' and 'what did member 12345 spend this month?', providing clear context for when to use this tool, though it lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance.

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