list_ci_tests

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It mentions listing and filtering but omits behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or read-only nature. The description lacks depth on how the tool behaves.

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?

Two efficient sentences with front-loaded purpose. Every sentence adds value, no 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?

Covers basic purpose and use cases, but with 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotation support, it leaves gaps in pagination, sorting, and output details. Adequate for a simple list tool but not fully complete.

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 0%. The description adds meaning for 'filter_query', 'filter_from', and 'filter_to' by referencing 'query' and 'time range', but does not explain 'page_limit', 'page_cursor', or 'sort'. Given low coverage, more detail is needed.

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 the action (List), resource (CI test events from Datadog CI Visibility), and filtering capabilities. The mention of use cases like 'show failed tests' differentiates from sibling tools.

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?

Provides explicit use cases ('show failed tests', 'test results for service X'), giving clear context. However, it does not specify when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives like search_ci_test_events.

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