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, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the GET endpoint and resource relationship but does not disclose pagination behavior or return details beyond what the schema suggests. No contradictions with annotations.

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 two concise sentences, including the endpoint reference. Every word earns its place; there is no wasted text or 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 simple list operation with full annotation coverage and a complete schema, the description is adequate. It clearly states what is listed and includes the endpoint. However, it does not explicitly mention pagination behavior or return list structure, which would make it fully complete for an agent without external API knowledge.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; it only restates the resource scope. The parameters (id, limit, next_url, fields_builds) are already well-documented in the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ("List") and resource ("builds belonging to a beta group"), clearly distinguishing it from broader list tools like builds__list. The HTTP endpoint is also included, making the operation unambiguous.

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 the tool is for retrieving builds scoped to a specific beta group, but it does not explicitly mention when to use it over the sibling tools such as builds__list or beta_groups__builds__add/remove. No alternatives or exclusions are stated, so usage guidance is only implied.

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