list_captures

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

No annotations exist, but the description discloses ordering (newest first), return format for success and failure, and parameter constraints. It does not mention rate limits or authentication, but for a read-only list operation, this is adequate.

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?

Three concise sentences cover purpose, parameters, and returns. No filler. Front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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?

Given the simplicity (3 optional params, pagination, no annotations), the description fully covers purpose, ordering, all parameters, and return structure. The output schema exists, but the description still adds value by explaining the response format.

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 0%, but the description explains each parameter: source lists allowed values, limit has range (1-500) and default (50), offset has default (0). This adds substantial meaning 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 explicitly states 'List captures, newest first.' This clearly identifies the verb (list) and resource (captures), and distinguishes from sibling tools like get_capture (single) and capture_url (creation).

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 explains optional source filtering and pagination (limit, offset) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like recall or daemon_status. However, the purpose is distinct enough given sibling names.

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