mlflow_runs_list_artifacts

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, so the description's minimal 'List' aligns. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond what annotations already convey (e.g., no mention of permissions or pagination).

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 sentence with the API path, which is concise but under-specified. It could include more context without being verbose.

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 simple tool with 2 parameters and readOnlyHint, the description is minimally adequate. It does not explain the purpose of the 'path' parameter or mention that artifacts are listed for a specific run, though this is inferred from the schema.

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%, so the description contributes no additional meaning beyond the schema's 'Run ID' and 'Artifact sub-path'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 run artifacts' clearly states the action (list) and resource (run artifacts). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mlflow_runs_get by focusing on artifacts listing, but lacks specificity about the operation being scoped to a run ID.

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 vs alternatives. The description does not indicate when to use listing artifacts versus retrieving run details or searching runs.

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