list_pending_operations

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool lists operations but does not disclose whether it is read-only (likely safe), side effects, rate limits, or permissions needed. Minimal disclosure beyond the basic action.

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 is front-loaded with the action and resource. It earns its place, though it could potentially include more structured details like return type without sacrificing conciseness.

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 no parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains the tool's purpose but lacks context about what 'pending operations' encompasses, return format, or any behavioral nuances. Adequate for a very simple tool but incomplete for richer understanding.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% trivially. According to guidelines, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed.

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 'List pending operations for crash recovery' clearly states the action (list) and resource (pending operations for crash recovery). It provides a specific purpose but does not explicitly distinguish it from sibling tools like 'clean_backups' or 'rollback_file'.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_server_stats' or 'clear_cache'. The description implies usage for crash recovery context but lacks explicit when-not or alternative suggestions.

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