acr_list_builds

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only restates the list action and parameter names. Missing details like read-only nature, pagination, rate limits, or required permissions. Agents lack insight into side effects or constraints.

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?

Description is short and includes a labeled 'Args' section, but is incomplete. Every sentence should provide value; here, the lack of usage and behavioral information reduces effectiveness despite conciseness.

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 complexity (2 optional params, no annotations, sibling tool), the description is incomplete. It does not clarify scope (subscription-wide vs specific registry?), pagination, or output format. Agents may underutilize or misuse the 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description adds basic semantic meaning: 'Resource group containing build runners' and 'Name of the container registry'. This adds value over schema titles but lacks constraints, format, or behavior when omitted. Could be more detailed.

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 states 'List build tasks' which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'acr_list_tasks', which likely covers similar or overlapping functionality. The agent may be confused about which tool to use for task listing.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions, prerequisites, or context for selection are given. Sibling tools like acr_list_tasks exist but no differentiation is made.

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