playbook_runs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. 'query' implies a read operation, but the description does not disclose pagination behavior (despite after/first variables), ordering semantics, or the structure of the response. It also does not state whether any side effects or special permissions are involved.

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 brief but poorly structured: it starts with a cryptic 'Playbooks ·' prefix, then lists variables, then an example that cuts off mid-value ('ticketNum...'). This truncation reduces effectiveness and clarity.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return format and usage more thoroughly. It does not state what the tool returns, how pagination works, or what the filter fields represent beyond the example. For a query tool with a complex nested filter, this is insufficient.

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 provides only type-level descriptions (e.g., 'GraphQL: PlaybookRunFilter'), and the description partially compensates by listing the variables and providing an example filter object with fields like created, platforms, and statuses. However, not all parameters are semantically explained (orderBy, customer_slug), and the example is truncated.

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 'Playbooks · query playbookRuns' identifies the resource as playbookRuns and indicates a query operation, but it lacks a strong action verb like 'list' or 'fetch' and does not distinguish from sibling tools such as playbook_run or playbooks. The inclusion of variables hints at read behavior but the purpose is not fully explicit.

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 versus alternatives. It merely lists variables and an example filter, without stating use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent is left to infer that this queries playbook runs, but no comparative guidance is given.

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