list_approvals

Does 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 clear. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond a generic 'optional filters' statement, which is already implied by the schema's optional parameters.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the primary action and resource. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant information.

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?

The tool is simple with three optional parameters and strong annotations, but the description lacks context about the difference from get_my_approvals, pagination behavior, or return value expectations. Since there is no output schema, some additional explanation of the response format or usage context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for all three parameters (limit, query, state), so the schema provides full parameter semantics. The description only says 'optional filters', adding no further meaning beyond what the schema already documents.

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 approval requests with optional filters, providing a specific verb and resource. However, it does not specify the scope (e.g., all approvals vs. user-specific), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_my_approvals.

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 such as get_my_approvals, approve_request, or reject_request. The description does not mention any prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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