plainweave_verification_status_list

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

The description states 'This tool records no evidence,' which is a behavioral trait. However, with no annotations, it should disclose more about side effects, permissions, or the meaning of 'local' and 'stale.' Lacks depth.

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 concise sentences without fluff. Each sentence adds value, but the first could be more informative. Overall efficient.

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?

With 3 parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It omits parameter semantics, output details, and context for 'local' and 'stale.'

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%, and the description does not mention any parameters. The agent receives no guidance on the meaning or usage of limit, offset, or status_filter.

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 the resource 'local unverified or stale verification statuses,' distinguishing it from the sibling get tool. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like plainweave_baseline_list.

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 when to use (to list unverified/stale statuses) but provides no guidance on when not to use or alternatives. No mention of the sibling get tool or other relevant tools.

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