List estimates

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

Annotations already signal read-only and open-world behavior. The description adds useful context about location scoping, pagination, and filtering, but does not go beyond that to mention output shape, sorting, or pagination behavior details. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single sentence packs the resource, synonym, location scope, pagination, and optional filters. Every word earns its place and the key action is front-loaded.

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 read-only list tool, the description provides enough to make a correct call: location, pagination, and available filters. It lacks explicit output/return-shape guidance and usage-vs-alternatives, but annotations cover the safety profile and the schema covers default values.

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 only 40%, so the description partially compensates by mentioning pagination and contact filtering. It clarifies that 'contactId' is used for filtering by contact, which the schema leaves undocumented. However, limit/offset semantics are only implied by 'pagination'.

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 names the resource ('estimates (quotes)') with explicit scope ('for a location'), pagination, and optional filters. This clearly distinguishes it from invoice and other list tools.

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 makes the basic usage evident: list estimates for a location, with optional status or contact filtering. However, it does not state when to prefer this over alternatives or mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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