List Tracker queue triggers

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine non-annotation behavior: auto-pagination and the default item cap applied when ``limit`` is omitted, plus the sort order. Auth/permission requirements are not 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?

Three tightly packed sentences: scope and return fields first, pagination behavior second, alternative tool last. No filler and the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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 two-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the returned fields, ordering, pagination cap, and the sibling alternative. Only minor gaps remain, such as permission requirements for reading a queue's triggers.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the YCLI__HTTP__MAX_ITEMS default for ``limit`` and the queue key/id format. The description restates the cap behavior without adding syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list every trigger of a queue), specifies the ordering (ascending by id), and enumerates what is returned (name, actions, conditions, active flag). It also distinguishes itself from the near-identically named tracker_triggers_get by naming it as the single-item alternative.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to ``triggers_get`` when a single trigger by id is needed, and explains the limit/pagination condition that governs bulk retrieval. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' beyond the single-item case, but the context is clear.

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