whodb_platform_transform_runs

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 context: that the workspace object targets a single call 'without changing defaults,' clarifying this read does not mutate session state — useful and not derivable from the hints alone.

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 no filler: purpose first, then the one behavioral nuance that matters (per-call targeting). Every sentence earns its place and the key constraint 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?

There is no output schema, so a list tool arguably should hint at what a run record contains or how 'recent' is bounded, and the description is silent on both plus on limit defaults/pagination. Given 100% schema coverage for inputs and read-only annotations, this is adequate but leaves the return shape uncharacterized.

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%, including per-field descriptions for limit, fields, and the nested workspace keys, so the schema does the heavy lifting and baseline is 3. The description only restates the per-call/non-persistent nature of workspace, adding minor reinforcement rather than new semantics.

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+resource ('List recent runs') scoped to 'one hosted transform,' which is clearly distinguishable from siblings like whodb_platform_transform, whodb_platform_transforms, and whodb_platform_function_runs. It does not, however, explicitly name or contrast with whodb_platform_transform_wait, which is the nearest ambiguous neighbor.

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 scope ('recent runs for one hosted transform') strongly implies when to reach for it, so usage is inferable. But there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no routing to alternatives such as transform_wait for awaiting completion or transforms for enumerating transforms.

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