list_builds

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe read, and the description usefully adds the default sort order (newest-first by upload date). However it says nothing about pagination behavior, result caps, or how auto_paginate affects return size — relevant for a list tool with a 1000 max limit.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste; the sort/scope statement is front-loaded ahead of the filter list. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the definition covers purpose, ordering, and filter surface. It stops short of explaining pagination or result shape, but annotations and schema carry most of the remaining load.

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 all five parameters (appId, limit, version, auto_paginate, processingState) are already documented in the schema. The description names a subset of the filters but adds no syntax, format, or semantics beyond what the schema carries. 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ("List recent builds") and adds sorting behavior (newest first by upload date). It clearly distinguishes this bulk-listing tool from the singular get_build sibling by implication, though it never names or contrasts with it explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the filter list, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus get_build for a single build, nor any note on pagination strategy or expected volumes. An agent can infer the intent but must guess at the alternative.

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