updown_list_rounds

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions pagination and ordering but omits whether the operation is read-only (likely), any side effects, auth needs, or error conditions. The lack of behavioral depth is significant for a list operation.

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 redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, pagination order, and filter options.

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?

While it covers the essential listing and filtering behavior, it does not explain cursor usage (beyond mentioning it in schema), pagination defaults (limit default 20, max 200), or what happens when the token is invalid. Given no output schema, a bit more context on return shape would be helpful, but it is minimally sufficient.

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 40% (only cursor and limit described). The description adds that 'tf' and 'outcome' are filters, but does not explain 'tf' as a number (likely timestamp or duration) or detail the enum values for asset or outcome. Baseline 3 is adjusted slightly downward for missing semantics on the remaining parameters.

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 states it lists paginated UPDOWN rounds for a token, newest-first, with optional filters. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like updown_bet, updown_claim, or updown_my_history.

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 explains the pagination and optional filters, implying use when listing rounds. However, it does not specify when to prefer this over other round-related tools (e.g., updown_get_round, updown_my_history), nor does it list exclusions or prerequisites.

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