lc_list_detections

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'one bounded page' hinting at pagination but does not explain sorting, rate limits, or if the operation is read-only. The behavioral profile is insufficient for safe agent invocation without additional 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, efficient sentence that conveys the core functionality without any redundant word or phrase. Every word adds meaning.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too brief to be fully complete. It does not explain pagination mechanics, filtering by category, or the structure of the returned results, leaving significant gaps for an agent to operate correctly.

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 0%, so the description must clarify parameters. It explains that 'oid' is the org, 'start' and 'end' define the time window, but it omits the optional parameters 'limit', 'cursor', and 'category', leaving their purpose unclear. The description adds value for the required parameters but fails to cover the full 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 clearly states the verb 'list', the resource 'detections', and essential constraints: 'one bounded page', 'explicit org', and 'unix-second time window'. This distinguishes it from related tools like lc_get_detection (single) and lc_list_case_detections (scoped to a case).

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 context (need an org and time window) but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like lc_get_detection or lc_list_case_detections. There are no explicit exclusions or usage boundaries.

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