list_action_runs

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses pagination behavior, response structure (wrapper object with workflow_runs key), and list of filters. Could mention read-only nature, but it's implied.

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?

Concise: purpose, pagination, filters, response structure, and usage hint in 4 sentences. Front-loaded with key info, no fluff.

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 9 parameters, no required, no output schema, description covers filters and pagination behavior. Response structure is explained. Missing details like error handling or rate limits, but sufficient for basic usage.

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 has 100% coverage; description adds value by explaining pagination logic, filter examples, and response key. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 tool lists Gitea Actions workflow runs in a repository, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_action_run, cancel_action_run, and rerun_action_run.

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?

Explicit guidance on pagination (1-based page, limit ≤ 100, stop when fewer than limit), filters (branch, event, status, actor, head_sha), and when to use: find a run's id before using other actions.

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