hosting_listNodeJSBuildsV1

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the sole source. It reveals pagination and filtering but does not mention authorization needs, rate limits, or non-destructive nature. The phrase 'each build represents a single run' adds context, but more behavioral details could be included.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant information. Every sentence contributes meaningfully.

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?

The description covers purpose, filtering, and next steps (logs). However, it lacks details on pagination behavior (page/per_page usage), expected response fields (beyond uuid), and error conditions. For a list tool with no output schema, this is adequate but not fully complete.

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 100% with basic descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the 'states' parameter's filtering capability and linking the 'uuid' from builds to the logs endpoint, providing workflow context beyond 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 clearly states the verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'paginated list of Node.js build processes for a specific website'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'hosting_getNodeJSBuildLogsV1' and 'hosting_listJsDeployments' by specifying 'build processes' and linking to logs endpoint.

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 explains how to use the 'states' parameter to filter and directs to 'Get Node.js Build Logs' for output polling. This provides clear context on when to use this tool and when to use an alternative, though explicit exclusions are not stated.

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