list_runs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses output fields (iterations, sessions, cost, flagged-call counts, status) but does not mention read-only nature, authorization needs, or error behavior. Listing is typically safe, but the description provides only moderate transparency.

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 with the main action and includes key output fields. It is concise, with no unnecessary words, and every part adds value.

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 simplicity of the tool (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description adequately covers what the tool returns and the types of runs listed. No critical information appears missing.

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 one optional parameter 'limit' with a description, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'list' and the resource 'loop runs', and distinguishes between two types of runs (explicit x-agentledger-run-id and auto-inferred fresh-context loops) with specific output fields, setting it apart from sibling tools like list_sessions.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_sessions or search. It mentions the two types of runs but lacks guidance on use cases or exclusion criteria.

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