jobs_runs_list

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read operation. The description adds no further behavioral traits such as pagination behavior (page_token), filtering nuances, or performance considerations. This is adequate but not enhanced beyond the annotation.

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, concise sentence with no extraneous text. However, it is so brief that it leaves out important context. Still, for what it provides, it is efficiently structured.

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?

Despite having an output schema (context shows has output schema true), the description does not explain the return format, pagination, or typical usage patterns. For a tool with 8 parameters, this is insufficient for an agent to fully understand its capabilities and limitations.

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 63%, meaning some parameters lack descriptions in both schema and description. The tool description adds no parameter information. For the uncovered parameters (completed_only, limit, page_token), the agent must infer meaning. The description does not compensate for the gaps in 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 'List historical job runs' clearly states the verb (list) and resource (job runs). However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like jobs_runs_get (single run) or jobs_list (jobs). The term 'historical' may be slightly misleading given the presence of active_only filter, but overall purpose is clear.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like jobs_runs_get, jobs_runs_cancel, or jobs_list. No context about prerequisites or typical scenarios. The description does not address when to use filters.

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