List credit notes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety. The description adds the paging and filtering behavior, which provides operational context. However, it does not disclose any additional side effects, limitations, or return shape beyond what the annotations imply.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the purpose and key capabilities. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

For a simple list tool with all optional parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient. It conveys the core functionality. However, it does not explicitly mention that the result is a paginated list or how the page parameters interact, though these are inferable from the schema and tool name.

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 already documents all three parameters (page, query, pageSize) with descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description's mention of 'paging and free-text filtering' loosely maps to these params but adds no extra detail like defaults, constraints, or accepted formats beyond what the schema provides.

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's action and resource: 'Lists credit notes'. It also mentions paging and free-text filtering, which are the key features. This distinguishes it from siblings like bokio_get_credit_note (which fetches a single note) and other list tools for different resources.

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 usage for listing credit notes with optional filters and pagination, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when to prefer this over bokio_get_credit_note or other list tools. The usage context is inferred from the name and description rather than spelled out.

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