gateway.list_pending

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the output fields but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or that it does not modify state. However, the action 'list' generally implies safety, and the use case suggests monitoring rather than mutation.

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: the first explains what the tool does, the second provides usage guidance. It is concise with no wasted words.

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?

The description includes what information the output contains, which is helpful given the lack of an output schema. The parameter is well-documented in the schema, and the overall context is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'server', which already includes a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the 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 explicitly states the verb (List), resource (pending tool invocations), and the specific data shown (health status, elapsed time, heartbeat age, current state). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gateway.tasks_list.

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 provides a clear use case: 'Use this to monitor long-running operations before deciding to cancel.' It implies when to use but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, though the context of canceling hints at the sibling cancel tool.

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