list_pending_approvals

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states 'Read-only', describes what the list contains, and specifies ordering. It could add more about pagination or empty results, but for a simple read-only list it is transparent enough.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the read-only nature, states the core behavior, and closes with the workflow-relevant instruction. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it names what is returned, the ordering, the read-only guarantee, and how the result relates to sibling tools. An agent has everything needed to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the limit parameter already has a detailed description in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond that, so the baseline 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?

Description names a specific verb and resource: listing pending approval requests. It clarifies the scope ('waiting for a human'), ordering (oldest first), and the included contents, making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like approve and deny.

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 instruction 'Start here' explicitly tells the agent to use this tool before approve and deny, and explains that the request IDs for those tools come from this list. This is direct workflow guidance that prevents misuse.

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