List execution properties

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

The read-only annotation covers the safety profile, but the description adds no additional behavioral context such as pagination, permissions, or effects of omitting the execution filter. It merely restates the return type, which is already evident from annotations.

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 short and front-loaded, but the opening phrase 'TestExecution.properties.' is cryptic and adds little value beyond the restated purpose.

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 low-complexity read-only list tool, the combination of description, schema, and annotation is sufficient. The return format (name/value pairs) is indicated, and the optional parameter is fully documented.

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 input schema fully documents the single optional parameter (execution_id) with a clear description, so the schema carries the burden. The tool description contributes no additional parameter meaning.

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 returns name/value properties for a given execution, distinguishing it from sibling property tools for runs and cases. The verb 'Returns' and the title 'List' specify the action and resource.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like kiwi_run_properties or kiwi_case_properties. The description only restates the resource type; the parameter hint about omitting execution_id is in the schema, not the tool description.

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