list_test_runs

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

Annotations confirm read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. Description adds that it returns specific fields (names, IDs, due dates), supplementing the annotation context. No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence clearly conveying purpose and output. No wasted words; appropriately 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?

Given full schema coverage, output schema presence, and annotations, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. Description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 title 'List Test Runs' and description 'List test runs in a test management project. Returns run names, IDs, and due dates.' clearly state the action (list), resource (test runs), and scope. Among sibling tools with many list operations, this distinguishes itself by focusing on test runs.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_test_results or list_test_plans. The description implies it's for listing test runs, but lacks when-not-to-use or prerequisites.

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