execution_list
Retrieve a summary of all past automation execution records to review and audit task history.
Instructions
List a summary of all past execution records.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Retrieve a summary of all past automation execution records to review and audit task history.
List a summary of all past execution records.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal context by noting it returns a 'summary' but does not disclose pagination, ordering, or limits, which are common for list tools. With annotations present, the added value is limited.
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, efficient sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and scope. No redundant or extraneous 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?
For a simple read-only list with no parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient to understand the tool's purpose. It does not mention return format or pagination, but these are not critical for a basic summary listing. The absence of explicit usage guidance slightly lowers completeness, but the tool is straightforward.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific details, which is acceptable since there are none to document.
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 states a specific verb 'List' and a clear resource 'all past execution records', which unambiguously differentiates it from sibling tools like task_list and schedule_list. It is specific and not a tautology.
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 viewing execution history but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. There are no exclusions or conditions given, leaving the agent to infer from the name and context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.