ig_queue_list

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'List' signals a read operation and the parenthetical discloses the key behavioral distinction between pending/running and full history, but it omits return format, ordering, pagination, and permission requirements.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The default scope is stated first and the parameter behavior is appended compactly.

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?

For a simple one-parameter list tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers the core scope and flag behavior. It still leaves gaps around return values, ordering, and how it differs from adjacent history-oriented tools.

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 for the single boolean parameter. It does so effectively by explaining that all:true returns full history while the default is pending/running, giving the boolean meaningful behavior beyond its bare type.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('queue items') and clarifies the default scope as pending/running. It does not, however, distinguish this from siblings like ig_history or explain why one would choose this list over that one.

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?

Usage is implied by the default pending/running scope and the all:true full-history mode. There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus ig_history or how it relates to queue action tools such as ig_queue_cancel and ig_queue_retry.

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