search_traces

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only says 'list recent traces' and does not specify ordering, default time window, pagination behavior, or error handling. This is minimal beyond the basic purpose.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the primary action and resource, then lists the key output fields. No filler or redundant information.

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?

The description and schema together cover the basic purpose and all inputs, but with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks contextual details like sorting, pagination, or typical usage patterns. It is adequate but has room for improvement.

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%, so the input schema already fully documents all five parameters, including defaults and examples. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, matching the baseline of 3.

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 action ('List') and resource ('recent traces'), and specifies the returned fields (root operation, duration, participating services). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_trace (single trace) and search_logs.

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 recent traces, but provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer this over get_trace or search_logs, leaving some ambiguity.

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