grocy_objects_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description adds only the raw endpoint path and repeats the entity enum already present in the schema; it says nothing about default page size, whether query[] filters are server-evaluated, or the shape of the returned records.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and endpoint, with no filler. The third sentence partly duplicates the entity enum from the schema, which is the only waste.

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?

A generic, open-world CRUD list tool with 5 parameters and no output schema needs more than this: pagination defaults/max behavior, what a returned object looks like, and which of the 34 enum entities behave differently. The definition is adequate to attempt a call but leaves meaningful gaps.

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 coverage is 60%: order and query[] already carry descriptions, entity has an enum plus description, while limit and offset are undocumented in both places. The description only restates the parameter names ('Optional query[], order, limit, offset') without adding pagination semantics or defaults, so it neither compensates nor detracts.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('List objects of a Grocy entity') and backs it with the underlying endpoint GET /api/objects/{entity}. The plural 'List' plus the entity enumeration clearly separates it from grocy_objects_get/create/update/delete, though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the list-vs-get naming and the endpoint shape, but there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this generic lister over the many specialized siblings (grocy_chores_list, grocy_batteries_list, grocy_tasks_list, grocy_stock_overview). No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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