beta_groups__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, covering basic safety. The description adds the endpoint URL but does not disclose additional behaviors (e.g., pagination handling, rate limits) beyond the schema. With annotations present, the description adds minimal extra context.

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 plus the endpoint URL. It is front-loaded with the essential purpose, leaving no wasted words.

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 annotations (readOnly, idempotent) and complete schema coverage, the description covers the basic functionality. However, without an output schema, a brief mention of the response structure (list of builds) would improve completeness. Pagination behavior is indirectly covered by the 'next_url' parameter description.

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%, with each parameter described in the schema. The tool description does not add further meaning or context to the parameters (e.g., that 'id' is the beta group ID). Baseline is 3; no additional value provided.

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 resource ('builds belonging to a beta group'), and includes the endpoint URL. It distinguishes this tool from sibling list tools (e.g., builds__list, beta_groups__list) by specifying the filtering context.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., builds__list for unfiltered builds, beta_groups__builds__add for adding builds). The usage context is implied but lacks exclusions or alternative suggestions.

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