List Previews

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds two pieces of context beyond that: the API is in beta (implying possible instability) and the returned URLs are stable. It does not describe pagination or result volume, which matters for an open-world list operation.

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?

One short sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then adds the payoff (stable URLs) and the beta caveat in a parenthetical. No filler.

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 read-only list tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, this is nearly sufficient. The only meaningful gap is how results are returned or paged, which the description omits.

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 coverage is 100% and the single script_name parameter is already documented by the schema. The description's 'a Worker's' reinforces that the parameter scopes to one script, but adds no format, naming, or ID-versus-name guidance beyond the schema.

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 a Worker's previews') and adds the useful detail that results carry stable URLs. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like list_deployments or list_versions, so the agent must infer the distinction from the word 'previews'.

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 and no mention of alternatives or prerequisites. The agent can infer it is the read counterpart to deploy_preview/delete_preview, but the description never says so or explains when a preview list is the right call versus deployments.

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