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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose the sort order and return fields, which is useful. However, it does not mention pagination, potential empty results, or any side effects, though this is a read-only list operation so the risk is lower.

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, information-dense sentence that leads with the core verb and resource, then lists ordering, output fields, and the filter in a natural reading order. Every element contributes meaning.

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 list operation with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key information: what it lists, the order, the fields returned, and the available filter. It does not mention how pagination via `limit` works, but that is already in the schema. Complete enough for an agent to invoke 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?

The input schema already documents both parameters (udid and limit) with 100% coverage. The description mentions the `udid` filter but does not add new detail beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is high, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 resource ('stored action recordings'), and adds concrete details about the result order and fields ('newest first — id, device, label, when it ran and what it captured'). This distinguishes it from related recording tools like ios_actions_record_start or ios_actions_recording_read.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose and the optional filter for device using `udid`, providing clear context. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for an agent to infer the primary use case.

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