rca_analysis_list_results

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds return format details, but omits that a 'token' parameter is required, which is a key behavioral input.

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?

Description is short and front-loaded with purpose, but its brevity leads to omitting important parameter details, making it less useful despite being concise.

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 simple list tool with good annotations, the description is adequate but incomplete: it does not explain the 'token' parameter's role (pagination vs. authentication) or how results are scoped.

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 0%, and description only explains 'limit' and 'offset', ignoring the required 'token' and optional 'client_id' parameters. This leaves critical parameter meaning unexplained.

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?

Clearly states it lists stored RCA result IDs with pagination, but does not distinguish from sibling tool 'rca_analysis_query_results' which may also return result IDs with filtering.

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 implicit (to list result IDs), but no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'rca_analysis_get_result' or 'rca_analysis_query_results'.

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