writ_receipts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'List' safely implies a read-only operation and 'Newest first' discloses result ordering, which is useful behavioral context. However, it says nothing about pagination, whether the trail is complete or filtered by caller, or any access restrictions.

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 short sentences with the resource named first and ordering front-loaded at the end. No wasted words, though it is arguably under-specified rather than maximally efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the tool is simple (1 optional param). Still, the absence of any usage context or access requirements leaves the definition marginally complete for an audit-trail tool.

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?

There is one parameter (limit) with a default of 10 and 0% schema description coverage, and the description adds no meaning about what limit bounds or its maximum. The parameter name is self-explanatory but the description does nothing to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (decision receipts / audit trail), and 'Newest first' clarifies ordering. It is reasonably distinguishable from the action-oriented siblings like writ_revoke or writ_grant, though it does not explicitly contrast with a potential alternative read tool.

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 never states when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any preconditions (e.g., which auth/role is required to view the audit trail). Usage is only implied by the word 'List'.

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