apps__builds__list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a sorting behavior note, but the phrasing 'newest first when sorted by -uploadedDate' is ambiguous about whether this is the default order. No details about pagination behavior or response envelope are provided, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

A single sentence with a clear verb, resource, and scope, plus the endpoint for reference. Every element serves a purpose, and there is no redundancy.

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 read-only list operation, the description covers the essential purpose and ordering, with parameter details fully supplied by the schema and annotations providing safety signals. The lack of an output schema is acceptable since the resource type ('builds') is explicitly named, though pagination defaults and exact response shape are not described.

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% with clear descriptions for all four parameters (id, limit, next_url, fields_builds), so the description does not need to elaborate on them. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, which aligns with the baseline for high schema coverage. The schema's 'ID from the matching list call' complements the app-scoped purpose.

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?

States 'List builds uploaded for an app' with a specific verb, resource, and app scope, clearly distinguishing it from sibling 'builds__list' by anchoring to an app ID. The endpoint and sorting hint further reinforce the operation's intent.

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 phrase 'for an app' establishes a clear use case (app-scoped builds) and implies this tool is for retrieving builds of a particular app. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficient for most selection decisions.

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