Retrieve recent Now Assist AI Agent execution plans with status, query, and limit filters to monitor runs, troubleshoot failures, and audit agent activity.
List recent Now Assist AI Agent execution plans (sn_aia_execution_plan)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Max records (default 25) | |
| query | No | Encoded query for additional filtering | |
| status | No | Filter by execution status |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v4.16.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the table name and the word 'recent', but does not explain what 'recent' means (e.g., time window, ordering) or any default behavior. It adds minimal context beyond 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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It states the action and resource immediately, making it efficient for an agent 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?
For a simple list tool with read-only annotations, the description is adequate but leaves ambiguity around 'recent' and does not mention pagination or the return structure (no output schema). It is minimal but functional; more detail on the 'recent' filter or the execution plan fields would improve completeness.
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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters (limit, query, status). The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline for schema-covered parameters.
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 tool lists 'recent Now Assist AI Agent execution plans' with a specific resource and table name (sn_aia_execution_plan). It is distinct from the sibling get_ai_agent_execution which fetches a single execution, so an agent can tell them apart.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that get_ai_agent_execution should be used for a single execution, nor does it describe any specific context or exclusions. The usage is only implied by the verb 'list'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.