martin_list_runs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds that runs are 'recent' and from 'run store', plus filter categories, but does not disclose details like ordering guarantees or filtering semantics beyond what annotations provide.

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, direct sentence that leads with the action and resource, then enumerates filter categories without redundant wording. Every segment earns its place.

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 seven optional parameters and an output schema present, the description is reasonably complete but leaves ambiguity around 'recent' ordering, 'lightweight filter' behavior, and how this tool compares with sibling inspection tools. The schema and output schema mitigate some of this, but an agent still lacks enough context for nuanced selection.

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%, and each parameter has its own description. The tool description merely groups filters into categories (status, lifecycle, engine metadata, recency), which maps to the schema parameters but adds no new detail 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('recent Martin runs from the run store'), and outlines filter categories. It clearly conveys a listing operation, distinct from single-run or diagnostic tools, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 gives no explicit when-or-when-not guidance nor any reference to alternative tools. The phrase 'lightweight filters' hints at simple listing scenarios, but the agent is left to infer when to choose this over martin_get_run or martin_inspect.

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