scrapeer_list_runs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: it is a listing operation for history, supports filtering by status/flow, and is not for retrieving run details. It does not describe pagination or ordering, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 compact and well-structured: a clear one-sentence purpose, followed by explicit capitalized usage guidelines. No filler or redundant repetition of schema details.

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 operation with complete schema documentation and strong annotations, the description plus schema provide sufficient context. It lacks an output schema and does not specify the response shape, but the explicit distinction from detail-oriented sibling tools helps set expectations. This is adequate for the tool's moderate complexity.

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 100% with meaningful descriptions for all four parameters (flow, limit, offset, status). The description only restates filtering by status and flow, adding no new semantic information beyond the schema. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 opens with 'List execution history,' which is a specific verb+resource statement. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly saying to use scrapeer_get_run_status or scrapeer_get_run_results for details of a specific run.

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 provides explicit 'USE THIS TOOL WHEN' conditions (past runs, execution history, finding a specific run) and a 'DO NOT USE' instruction with named alternative tools. This leaves no ambiguity about when to select this tool.

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