List Builds

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

The description adds significant behavioral details beyond annotations: sorting order, pagination via nextUrl, default and maximum limit, and a full return structure. Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description enriches transparency.

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 concise with a front-loaded one-liner, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is informative, and there is no redundancy or waste.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description provides a full return structure with field details, covering pagination, sorting, and all fields. Annotations cover safety. The description is complete for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 100%, so the description's Args section mostly restates schema info. It adds that limit defaults to 20 and nextUrl comes from a previous call, but these are also in the schema. The description adds little beyond the schema.

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 action 'list', the resource 'builds', the scope 'for an app', and the sorting 'by upload date (newest first)'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like asc_list_apps or asc_list_beta_groups by specifying 'builds'.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when-not or suggest other tools for related tasks. However, the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer typical usage.

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