jamjet_list_executions

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

Discloses read-only nature, no side effects, ordering by creation time, pagination offset/limit behavior, default limit, and return format referencing jamjet_get_execution. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and meets it well.

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?

Seven sentences, each earning its place: purpose, read-only assertion, usage examples, return format, ordering, pagination, and optionality. No redundancy or filler.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: what it does, when to use, how it behaves (ordering, pagination), parameter details, return structure. No output schema, but description sufficiently clarifies return format by referencing another tool. Could mention error handling, but not required for basic completeness.

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 baseline 3. Description adds value by stating parameters are optional and giving usage examples (e.g., filter by status). Also explains combined pagination behavior beyond schema's individual descriptions.

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?

Clearly states it lists workflow executions with optional filtering and pagination. Distinguishes from siblings by mentioning usage for finding paused executions (to approve via jamjet_approve) or running ones, implying contrast with single-execution tool jamjet_get_execution.

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?

Explicitly describes when to use: to find executions needing attention, e.g., paused for approval or running for monitoring. Implicitly suggests alternatives via mention of jamjet_approve. Does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for single execution), but context is clear.

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