list_exchanges

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

Discloses that only provenance is returned (not bytes) and ordering is newest-first, but does not explicitly state that it is read-only or that it has no side effects. Decent for a list tool but lacks complete safety 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?

Two sentences: first covers purpose and parameters, second provides alternative. Front-loaded and efficient. No wasted words.

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?

Complete for a filtered-list tool: states what is listed, filtering, ordering, and alternative. No output schema or annotations; missing pagination details and return field names.

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?

Describes four filter parameters and mentions limit defaults to 20, but schema coverage is 0% and the description does not explain format or constraints. Adds some meaning but insufficient for 0% coverage.

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?

Describes the tool as listing archived exchanges with provenance only, newest first, and optional filtering by multiple fields. Clearly states what is returned (not bytes) and distinguishes from recall_exchange.

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?

Explicitly suggests using recall_exchange for full verification, providing an alternative. Mentions filtering and ordering context. No explicit when-not-to-use beyond that.

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