Recent requests

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the safety profile is already known; the description adds useful behavioral context about child counts and the distinction between error-status responses and exceptions. It does not contradict the annotations and adds enough context to set agent expectations.

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 sentences, with the core definition front-loaded and a practical filter example in the second. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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?

The definition is complete for a read-only, fully optional-filter list tool: it names the output shape (requests with child counts), provides a filtering use case, and the schema covers all five parameters. No output schema is present, but the description supplies the key return concept.

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 parameters like minStatus and uriContains are already documented; the description adds meaning by highlighting the minStatus: 400 failure-detection pattern and the child-count output. This goes beyond merely restating schema fields.

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 identifies the resource ('incoming requests') and a defining attribute ('with child counts'), and its example filter signals a retrieval operation. It distinguishes from siblings like recent_exceptions and slow_queries by scope, though it uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb.

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 gives a concrete, high-value usage example: using minStatus: 400 to find failures that returned an error status without throwing. This implies when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer recent_exceptions, request_detail, or slow_queries instead.

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