list_recordings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It implies read-only behavior via 'List' and mentions returning recording_path, but does not explicitly state side effects or confirm it is non-mutating. It also doesn't describe output structure, though an output schema exists. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Three sentences, no fluff. The core purpose is front-loaded, usage guidance is explicit, and the follow-up step is concise. 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?

Given zero parameters and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It clarifies the tool's place in the history plane and provides next steps. Minor gap: it doesn't explicitly state it's read-only or list all recordings without filters, but that's inferable from the name and context.

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?

Zero parameters, so schema provides no details; baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific info (none needed), but it does mention 'recording_path' in a usage context, which hints at what output might contain.

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 saved recording files (.chlsj files), with a specific verb ('List') and resource. It differentiates itself from live capture tools by explicitly naming the history plane, making it distinct from siblings like start_live_capture.

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 states when to use (only when user references saved recordings) and when not to (prefer start_live_capture for live traffic). It also gives a follow-up instruction to preserve recording_path for later calls, guiding the agent's workflow.

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