tracesList

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds useful behavior beyond that: newest-first ordering, carried duration and expiry metadata, and the non-obvious caveat that expired traces remain listed but reading them answers 'wrong input data'.

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 dense sentences front-load the core purpose and route, then add only essential caveats. Every part earns its place, with no filler or repetition of what the schema already provides.

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?

With no output schema, the description still tells the agent what each returned run carries (id, duration, expiration) and what downstream operations are possible. Combined with full schema coverage and safety annotations, nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters (user, limit, includeLinks) without needing compensation. The description does not add parameter-level semantics, which is appropriate given full schema coverage.

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 identifies a specific list resource ('traces recorded for this user'), explicit ordering ('newest first'), and the key payload ('their ids'). It also distinguishes itself from related tools by naming the downstream tools it feeds: tracesHitList, tracesStatements, and tracesDbAccess.

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?

It explicitly positions this tool as the entry point ('the way into') for three sibling tools, giving strong contextual guidance. It does not, however, state when an alternative listing tool should be preferred, so it falls just short of a full when/when-not specification.

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