List recent extractions

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, so the bar is lower. The description does add real context beyond annotations: the fixed limit of 10 and the fields returned (status, file name, template, time). It stops short of covering pagination, ordering, or auth, which is acceptable for a capped list.

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?

A single compact sentence that front-loads the verb, resource and cap, then parenthetically enumerates the payload. No filler, nothing an agent must read past.

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 no output schema, the parenthetical field list usefully compensates by telling the agent what comes back, and the 10-item cap sets expectations. For a zero-param read-only tool this is nearly complete; only ordering/pagination nuance is left implicit, which is marginal given the hard cap.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing parameter-wise for the description to explain, and the listed return fields are informative without being a substitute for schema documentation.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (extraction requests) and an explicit scope (last 10), with the returned fields enumerated. It is distinct from get_extraction (single item) and extract_document (the action), but it never names a sibling to sharpen the distinction.

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 word "recent" and the cap of 10 imply the tool is for scanning extraction history, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus get_extraction or extract_document, and no exclusions. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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