tracecat_list_actions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, rate limits, or the size of the returned list. The description only states the action without detailing side effects or performance implications.

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 clear sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. However, it is too brief and does not include important behavioral context, making it borderline under-specified. Still, it earns its place.

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 lack of output schema and annotations, the description fails to clarify the return format or any important contextual details (e.g., whether the list includes all action metadata or just IDs). The tool is simple, but the description is insufficient for an agent to understand what to expect.

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% with the parameter 'workflow_id' described as 'Workflow ID'. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by linking the workflow_id to the context. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 all actions for a given workflow' clearly specifies the verb (list), resource (actions), and scope (for a given workflow). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like tracecat_create_action and tracecat_get_action, and other list tools (e.g., tracecat_list_workflows).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tracecat_get_action for a single action, or what prerequisites exist. It lacks context about whether the workflow must exist or be deployed.

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