list_motions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds pagination, service-account scoping, and default sort order, which is useful context but does not reveal deeper behaviors like rate limits or response structure.

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 sentences with no filler; the action, scope, pagination, and ordering are all clearly stated. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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 simple read-only list operation with fully documented parameters and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, scope, pagination, and sorting. It could mention that nextToken continues previous results, but the schema already defines it, so no critical gap remains.

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%, so limit, nextToken, and sortAscending are fully documented in the schema. The description adds the default ordering context ('newest first by default'), which complements but does not replace the schema's parameter information.

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 ('retrieves') and resource ('motion generations'), and adds scope ('authenticated service account') and pagination/sorting details. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like search_motions or list_batch_motions, but the core operation is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_motions or list_batch_motions. There is no mention of filtering capabilities, exclusions, or conditions that would select this tool over others.

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