pending_action_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It explains the effect of the status parameter (empty means list all), but does not mention side effects, permissions, or output format. This is minimal but not misleading.

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 sentence conveys the core purpose and a key behavioral detail. Every word is necessary, and the description is front-loaded.

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 tool has no output schema, so the agent relies on the description for return expectations. The description does not mention what the response contains, leaving a gap. However, for a simple list tool, the basic purpose is clear.

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?

The input schema provides only a type and default for the status parameter. The description adds critical meaning: that an empty value lists all actions, which is not evident from the schema alone. For a single parameter, this adds significant value.

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 the tool lists pending confirmation actions and explains the behavior when status is empty, clearly identifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like pending_action_cancel and pending_action_confirm.

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. Sibling tools exist for canceling, confirming, and creating pending actions, but the description does not help the agent decide which tool to invoke.

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