list_captures

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It reveals the behavioral context of PreCompact captures and the recovery workflow, but doesn't detail return format or side effects, which are minimal for a list operation. Adds value beyond a simple 'list captures'.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, context, and workflow. Front-loaded with the primary action, concise with no fluff.

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 simple listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for selection and invocation. It also integrates with sibling tools (boot_report, read_capture, end_session), making the workflow complete.

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 covers 100% of the parameters, so baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra semantic detail about session_id; it is fully explained in 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?

The description clearly states it lists PreCompact captures, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like read_capture by focusing on listing, and adds context about preserving pre-compaction context.

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?

Explicit workflow is given: if boot_report lists PreCompact captures, call list_captures then read_capture to recover context before relying on the checkpoint; also check for unreviewed captures before end_session. This clearly indicates when to use the tool versus alternatives.

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