buildx_history_ls

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

Discloses behavior beyond annotations: parses from `--format '{{json .}}'`, version requirement, error behavior for older versions, and details about returned fields. Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive, and description adds value.

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?

Efficient, well-structured description with front-loaded purpose, bulleted args/returns, and no extraneous information. Every sentence contributes.

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?

Covers all aspects: purpose, output format, parameter, return type, version requirement, and relationship to sibling tool. No gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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?

Only parameter 'builder' is described with default behavior ('defaults to the active builder') and purpose. Schema coverage is 0%, so description compensates well, though could be more explicit about builder instance.

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?

Clearly states 'List recent build records' and describes the resource as 'BuildKit build history'. Distinguishes from sibling buildx_history_inspect by stating it is useful for drilling into that tool.

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 mentions when to use (finding builds to drill into with buildx_history_inspect) and includes version requirement warning. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but provides clear context.

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