p4_changes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates that the operation lists changelists, but it does not mention result format, default limits, ordering, or the fact that filtering by status can return pending and shelved changelists despite the 'submitted' wording.

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 concise sentence with no filler or redundant restatement. The core action and object are front-loaded, and 'advanced filtering' summarizes the parameter Surface area without unnecessary length.

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 list-style tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It does not clarify default behavior, the meaning of the returned changelist summaries, or how status filtering expands beyond 'submitted', leaving an agent to infer important calling context.

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 parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description adds only a generic 'advanced filtering' qualifier and no parameter-specific detail, which matches the baseline of 3 for fully covered schemas.

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 action ('List') and resource ('changelists') with a filtering qualifier, which clearly distinguishes it from detail-oriented siblings like p4_describe or p4_filelog. However, it narrows the scope to 'submitted' changelists while the status parameter also supports pending and shelved, so the stated scope is slightly incomplete.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as p4_opened, p4_describe, or p4_changelist_create. The phrase 'advanced filtering' implies a listing use case, but there are no explicit context cues, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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