list_creations

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals paging behavior, cursor contract, source cardinality, and mayhem filtering. It does not describe the page payload or the semantics of to/from, so it falls just 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?

Four sentences, each carrying a distinct actionable constraint: resource/scope, source cardinality, mayhem filter, and pagination. No filler or repetition; critical caveats are inline where they matter.

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 six-parameter paginated list with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main invocation path well. But the undocumented to/from parameters and unspecified page fields beyond next leave meaningful gaps for an agent.

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 50%, and the description adds real value: source is clarified as a singularity ('NOT an array'), excludeMayhem is explained as dropping mayhem-mode launches, and cursor is tied to the previous response's next. However, to and from remain entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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?

Description states the exact resource ('recent token creations (launches)') and scope ('one page') with a clear verb. It also distinguishes itself from tail_stream by noting this is not a multi-source array tool, which removes ambiguity among siblings.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative for live multi-source use ('tail_stream with sources'), gives the single-source constraint, and provides the full pagination procedure: pass previous next, stop when next is null. This is direct when-to-use and how-to-use guidance.

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