list_requests

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

With no annotations, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits, but it only says the tool lists recent filtered requests. It does not mention authentication requirements (password, token, username), pagination via limit/offset, base URL handling, result ordering, or what 'recent' means, leaving significant behavioral uncertainty for a 12-parameter tool.

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 with no wasted words and front-loads the primary action and resource. It is concise, though it is perhaps too brief to carry the usage and behavioral guidance a tool of this complexity needs.

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 tool with 12 optional parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and many closely related sibling tools, the description is not complete enough. An agent still needs to infer authentication behavior, pagination defaults, recency boundaries, and when to use a different list/search tool.

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 schema describes all 12 parameters with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to restate them. The description adds only the general 'optional filtering' framing, which is light but acceptable given the schema already documents each parameter's meaning.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List Clockwork requests') and adds the optional filtering qualifier, so an agent can tell it is a request-listing operation. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling search_requests or get_latest_request, both of which overlap in function.

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 about when to choose list_requests over alternatives such as search_requests or get_latest_request. The phrase 'optional filtering' implies a general listing use case, but no explicit context, exclusions, or sibling comparisons are provided.

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