list_step_results

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the return format including status codes, which is helpful, but does not mention read-only nature, pagination, or other side effects. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 efficient, using two sentences to convey purpose, parameter sourcing, and return format. There is no wasted text, and critical information is front-loaded.

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 output schema, the description includes return field details (status codes with meanings), which is good. It does not mention optional fields, but for a list tool, the provided information is reasonably complete. The lack of annotations is compensated by the clear explanation.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. For 'execution_id', it provides useful context (numeric id from specific tools). However, 'expand' is unexplained, leaving a gap. The description partially compensates for the lack of schema docs.

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 'List the per-step results for an execution,' using a specific verb and resource. This differentiates it from sibling tools like 'list_test_steps' which lists test steps, not step results.

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 context by noting that 'execution_id' comes from 'list_executions' or 'search_executions', guiding the agent on where to obtain the required parameter. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool references but is sufficient for effective use.

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