aureon_list_decisions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it says nothing about read-only safety, result ordering, pagination, or result volume. For a list endpoint that could return an unbounded collection, the omission of ordering/pagination behavior is a real gap.

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?

It is a single short, front-loaded fragment with zero waste, but it is under-specified rather than merely concise — no verb, no object framing, no clause telling the agent how to call it. Brevity here costs information rather than saving it.

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 one-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at minimum state that it returns a collection and what unfiltered calls return. Neither is present, leaving the agent unable to predict the response shape or scope.

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% and the single objectiveId parameter is documented as 'Limit to one objective', so the schema already carries the semantics. The description adds no filtering syntax or default-scope detail beyond that, which is the expected baseline of 3.

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 identifies the resource (decision records) and the triggering action types (set, change, pause, resume), but never states the verb explicitly or that it returns a collection. It also does not distinguish this list tool from the sibling aureon_get_decision, so an agent must infer the list-vs-single semantics from the name alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no indication of the default scope when objectiveId is omitted, and no reference to the closely related aureon_get_decision sibling. The agent is left to guess whether this is the right entry point for retrieving decision history.

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