list_my_tool_requests

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool behaves exactly like list_my_ideas (by being an alias), which is a transparent statement of its behavior. It does not detail side effects, but for an alias none are expected beyond the target tool's behavior.

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 sentence that is perfectly concise and front-loaded with the essential purpose. It wastes no words and is easy to parse.

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 tool is a simple alias with no parameters, output schema, or complex behavior, the description fully covers what an agent needs: it identifies the tool as an alias and directs to the preferred option. No additional context is necessary.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (trivially). The description adds nothing about parameters, but with no parameters, it cannot add value. The baseline of 4 is appropriate as there is nothing to compensate for.

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 immediately states it is an alias for list_my_ideas, clearly identifying its function and distinguishing it from the preferred tool. This is a specific and unambiguous purpose statement.

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?

It explicitly instructs to prefer list_my_ideas, providing a clear directive on when to use this tool (only as a fallback) and naming the alternative. This is explicit guidance for tool selection.

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