list_side_effects

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

The verb 'list' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, nor does it mention any permissions, limitations, or potential impacts. There are no annotations to clarify behavior, so this remains ambiguous.

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 concise and front-loaded with the primary action and object. It does not waste words, though it could benefit from slightly more detail. The structure is clear and easy to parse.

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 description covers the core action and filter, but lacks details about the output structure, pagination behavior, or any nuances like sorting or default ordering. Without these, an agent might not fully understand what to expect when calling this 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 provides only titles for the parameters (Limit, Public Id) with no descriptions. The description text adds that public_id is for filtering by issue, but does not clarify its format, purpose, or how limit affects results. Overall, parameter coverage is low.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'simulated side effects', and it specifies an optional filter by issue public_id. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_issues or get_issue, which have different purposes.

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 gives minimal guidance on when to use this tool, only mentioning the optional filter. It does not explain when to prefer this over alternatives like search_issues or get_issue, nor does it provide any usage context or examples.

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