list_executions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation by using 'List', but doesn't specify permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what 'recent' means (e.g., time range or default limit). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with execution data.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action ('List recent executions') and adds optional filtering details concisely, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 complexity (a list operation with filtering), lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances like ordering or default behaviors, leaving the agent with insufficient context for reliable use.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but only partially does. It mentions filtering by 'workflowId and status', covering two of the three parameters, but omits 'limit' entirely and provides no details on parameter formats, constraints, or interactions (e.g., how filtering combines). This is inadequate given the low schema coverage.

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 verb ('List') and resource ('recent executions'), making the purpose specific and understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_execution' (which retrieves a single execution) by indicating it returns multiple items, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with all similar tools like 'get_execution_trace'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_execution' or 'get_execution_trace'. It mentions optional filtering but doesn't specify scenarios where filtering is appropriate or when other tools might be better suited, leaving the agent with minimal usage context.

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