system.operations

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool works even while the main thread is busy, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention whether it reads or mutates state, though 'list' implies read-only. No side effects or auth needs are noted.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and concise. Every word adds value: it specifies what is listed, the scope (in-flight and recent), the information shown (progress), and a key usage advantage (works during busy thread). No waste.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers purpose, scope, and a notable behavioral trait. No additional context is needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so no param info is needed. The description adds no parameter semantics, which is acceptable given the absence of parameters. Baseline is 4.

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 the tool lists in-flight and recent operations with progress, specifying the exact resource (operations) and action (list). It distinguishes from siblings like system.health or system.cancel by focusing on operation tracking.

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 implies usage for monitoring operations, especially when the main thread is busy, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like system.health or system.cancel. No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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