po_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description does not contradict that. It adds that each row carries specific fields and that savedViewId is supported, providing some behavioral context beyond the annotation. However, it does not disclose pagination or sorting 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 two sentences, concise and front-loaded with the primary action. The second sentence introduces savedViewId with somewhat cryptic language ('G00`s saved-view seam'), which may reduce clarity, but overall it is brief.

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 description provides the key filter options and lists the fields returned, but lacks details on pagination, sorting, or the required workspaceId. Given that there is no output schema and only readOnlyHint annotation, the description could be more complete for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameter roles. It explains status and supplierContactId as filters, and mentions savedViewId support. It does not explain workspaceId, which is required, but that is often self-evident. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 it lists purchase orders (P5) and specifies available filters (status, supplier). It distinguishes from other PO operations by indicating a list function, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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?

It implies usage for listing orders with optional filters, but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. other PO tools (e.g., po_get for a single order). No exclusion criteria are provided.

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