reverse_list_captures

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only says 'List imported captures' but does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, whether it affects state, what the output format is, or any side effects. For a tool that lists data, the lack of explicit read-only confirmation and return format details is a gap.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It is appropriately sized for a simple list tool, with no wasted words. It could add a bit more context about the limit parameter or return format, but it is not overly verbose.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks explicit behavioral context (e.g., read-only nature, ordering, or what 'imported captures' means in contrast to other capture types). The output schema exists, so return values are covered, but the description could better clarify the scope of 'imported captures'.

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. The description does not mention the 'limit' parameter at all, but the parameter is simple (an integer with a default of 20) and its meaning is fairly inferable from the name 'limit'. The description adds no explicit meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate given the simplicity of the single parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('imported captures from the local SQLite store'), which clearly identifies the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from siblings like reverse_query_entries or list_recordings by specifying 'imported captures' and 'local SQLite store', though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 implies usage context: it lists imported captures from the local SQLite store, which suggests it is for reviewing previously imported data. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like reverse_query_entries or list_recordings, nor does it provide exclusions or conditions.

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