tracking_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether results are paginated, permission requirements, or what happens with multiple active sessions. Only filter example values are disclosed.

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 front-loaded and compact: one sentence states the purpose, then a short Args section documents both optional parameters. Every line earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple two-filter list tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose and parameter meanings. It still omits usage routing against sibling tools and behavioral details like pagination or read-only guarantees, so it is adequate but not fully complete.

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%, and the description compensates well by explaining both parameters: 'template' and 'status', including example values for each. It falls short of perfect because it does not clarify whether values are exhaustive, case-sensitive, or how the filters combine.

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 and resource: 'Liste les sessions avec filtres optionnels.' This distinguishes it from sibling mutation tools like tracking_create and tracking_update. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from tracking_get, which also retrieves tracking data.

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 says filters are optional but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tracking_get or tracking_templates. It also does not state any prerequisite context or exclusions.

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