list_builds

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the verb 'List'. It does not indicate whether the tool is read-only, what permissions are needed, or any side effects. Given the absence of annotations, more transparency is expected.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no fluff. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function and available filters.

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?

For a list tool with 4 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: it lists the kind of data returned and mentions filters. It could hint at default sorting or pagination, but overall covers the essential information.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for all 4 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by naming the attributes returned and stating that version and processing_state are filters, which aligns with schema descriptions. No additional syntax or format details are provided 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?

Description clearly states 'List TestFlight builds for an app' with specific attributes (build/upload number, app version, etc.), and mentions filtering by pre-release version or processing state. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_build (single build) or list_apps (different resource).

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 explicitly mentions filtering by 'pre-release version or processing state', indicating when to use these parameters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives like get_build for a single build, though the sibling list provides context.

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