Reflect: List Suite Executions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds little beyond saying 'all executions', with no mention of pagination, sorting, limits, or response format, but it does not contradict the annotations.

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 primary sentence is direct and front-loaded. The 'Toolset' and 'Parameters' sections add some redundancy with the schema, but the overall description is compact and easy to scan.

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 one-parameter read-only list operation, the description is adequate to select and invoke the tool. However, there is no output schema and no description of what an execution entry contains, which leaves the agent guessing about the return shape.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the description's 'Parameters' section merely repeats the schema text for suiteId. No additional meaning or format details are provided, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List all executions for a given suite.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from the sibling reflect_get_suite_execution_status (single status) and reflect_list_suites (list suites), even without explicitly naming alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of related siblings such as reflect_get_suite_execution_status, reflect_execute_suite, or reflect_cancel_suite_execution, and no mention of exclusions or prerequisites. The intended use is only implied by the description and title.

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