list_runs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the newest-first ordering, which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about read-only semantics, pagination behavior once limit is reached, or permissions.

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 tight sentences with the operation, ordering, and filter stated first, followed by a brief usage note. No filler; the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, for a tool with 0% parameter documentation and no annotations, the description should at least clarify valid 'kind' values and limit/pagination behavior to let an agent call it correctly.

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 0% for both parameters. The description explains that 'kind' acts as an optional filter but never states what kind values exist (no enum, default is empty string), and it says nothing about 'limit' or its default of 20, leaving half the parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List recent registry entries') plus a sort order ('newest first') and an optional filter ('by kind'). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly position itself against siblings like run_details or log_run, which an agent must infer.

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?

'Use this at session start to recall project history' specifies a concrete situation for invoking the tool. There are no exclusions or named alternatives, but the usage context is clear enough for an agent to act on.

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