list_scans

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses auth behavior ('Public') and pagination, but doesn't clarify what a 'harvest scan' is, the return format, or any error/edge conditions. This is some helpful context but not rich behavioral disclosure.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core action ('List harvest scans'). It includes a fragment ('Public.') and a tangential note about paid ticker routes, which could be clearer, but the one-sentence primary info is efficient. It's appropriately sized for a simple list tool.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand on its own. It covers the basic operation and auth, but lacks a definition of 'harvest scans', expected return structure, or any pagination details beyond 'paginated'. This leaves minor gaps for an agent unfamiliar with the domain.

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?

The input schema provides full descriptions for both 'page' and 'limit' (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter-level detail, so it doesn't go beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('harvest scans'), making the core purpose clear. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling 'get_scan' but the plural form and 'list' verb imply a collection operation. Additional detail includes pagination, which adds scope clarity.

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 implies the tool is for listing scans and notes that it is public, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like 'get_scan' or 'get_signals'. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided, leaving usage guidance largely implied.

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