jaicp_operations

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. The verb 'List' conveys a read-only operation and the description names the search dimensions, but it does not disclose what happens when search is omitted, the output shape, ordering, or edge cases. This is adequate but minimal.

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 primary purpose is front-loaded and the optional search behavior is stated directly. Every word 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 low-complexity two-parameter listing tool, the description is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke it correctly. The spec enum is in the schema, and the description explains the optional search behavior. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the clear 'List operations' framing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds real meaning to the search parameter by specifying it can filter over operationId, path, and summary, which is not inferable from the schema. For 'spec', the schema's enum already documents valid values, while 'from one spec' clarifies its role.

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 clearly states the tool lists OpenAPI operations from a single spec and outlines searchable fields. It is specific about the verb and resource, but it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tools (e.g., jaicp_specs for listing specs, jaicp_call for invoking an operation), so sibling differentiation is left implied rather than stated.

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 phrase 'from one spec' gives a clear usage context: use this tool when you need operations belonging to a specific spec. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tool should be chosen instead, such as jaicp_specs for finding available specs.

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