dosare_list

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety behavior is covered. The description adds useful context about returned fields such as status, next step, deadline days left, and linked counts, but it does not mention pagination, permissions, or filtering behavior.

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 compact and front-loads the core resource definition before listing fields and categories. It is somewhat dense and could better signal the listing action, but every sentence contributes useful context.

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?

With no output schema and only 60% schema coverage, the description partially compensates by describing returned fields like status, deadlines, and linked counts. However, it leaves out important listing behavior such as pagination, result ordering, and how the optional filters affect the returned set.

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%, and the description adds some meaning by enumerating case types and status values that map to the type and status enums. It does not explain the filtering roles of clientId, supplierId, or companyId beyond what the schema already provides, so the 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 clearly identifies the resource as company case files (dosare) and enumerates the relevant categories: rental contracts, annual returns, periodic returns, and fiscal standing. It stops short of explicitly saying 'list' and does not distinguish the tool from sibling dosare_get, but the resource scope is still clear.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as dosare_get, dosare_stats, or dosare_create. It implies a listing use case through its field summary, but there are no explicit usage conditions or exclusions.

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