list_process_executions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying supported filters (process ID/name, card/document ID/title, status) and that rows are enriched with process name, card title, and current state title. This provides behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

The description is two concise sentences. The first sentence front-loads the main purpose and read-only nature. The second adds filter and enrichment details without fluff.

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?

Given the tool has 4 optional parameters and an output schema, the description adequately explains the filters and enrichment. It does not mention pagination with the limit parameter, but the schema covers that. Overall, it provides a clear picture for an agent to use the tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by specifying that the 'process' parameter accepts process ID or name, and the 'card' parameter accepts card ID or title, which is more informative than the schema's 'a string that will be trimmed'. Status and limit are adequately covered by 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'read-only Huly Process workflow executions', distinguishing it from siblings like 'list_processes' (which lists processes themselves) and 'get_process' (single process). The read-only nature is explicit.

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 description implies usage for listing executions with filters, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor alternatives among the many sibling list tools. The read-only hint is present but no comparison to other tools.

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