List active crawls

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower, and the description still adds real behavioral context: only process-local crawls, including startup-resumed ones, and an explicit empty-result state. It does not mention pagination or result ordering, keeping it short of a 5.

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 dense sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the scope qualifier, and the returned fields are appended compactly. The nested parenthetical is slightly clunky but nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating id, start URL, status, pages so far, and start options. Combined with the explicit empty-state note, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and it correctly avoids inventing parameter semantics.

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 (crawls) with a precisely scoped qualifier: crawls the API process is running, including those resumed at startup. The parenthetical 'never a batch' distinguishes it from batch-oriented siblings, so an agent can separate it from get_batch/get_crawl without opening a schema.

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 'never a batch' clause gives an implicit exclusion and 'Empty when nothing runs' hints at the precondition, but no alternative is named for the single-crawl case (get_crawl) or the batch case. Usage is implied rather than stated, which is the definition of a 3.

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