list_requests_v1_requests_get

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

Adds behavioral context such as default sorting, sort parameter usage, and authentication effect on response. However, with no annotations, it omits other aspects like idempotence, safety, or rate limits. The GET verb implies read-only, but not stated.

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?

Two sentences, no redundant information. Efficiently conveys the endpoint, purpose, and key behavioral notes. Front-loaded with purpose.

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 no output schema, the description could elaborate more on response fields or filtering usage. It mentions authenticated upvote status but lacks guidance on filter parameters (status, category, etc.). Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 71%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value for the sort parameter by explaining its default behavior. Other parameters are already described in the schema. No additional semantics for limit, offset, status, etc.

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?

Clearly states the action 'List Requests' and the resource 'dataset requests in the public queue'. Distinguishes itself from siblings like get_request_detail by focusing on listing, but does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools.

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?

Provides context on sorting options and authentication effect, but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like submit_request or get_request_detail. No explicit 'when not to use' guidance.

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