get_bot_actions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses the output is parsed rather than raw JSON, but it does not mention pagination behavior, error conditions, or whether the operation has side effects. For a list operation 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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It clearly states the verb, object, and a key qualifier, making it efficient while conveying the core distinction.

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 is simple, but with no output schema or annotations, the description leaves gaps about the return shape, pagination, and error cases. It is enough for basic selection but not fully complete for calling the tool correctly.

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 50%: file_id is described, but limit has only numeric constraints with no semantics. The description does not clarify how limit applies (e.g., number of nodes returned) and provides no additional meaning beyond 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('a bot's action nodes') while adding a distinguishing qualifier ('parsed, not the raw JSON'). This differentiates it from sibling tools related to executions (get_execution, list_executions).

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?

The 'not the raw JSON' hint implies that this tool is for parsed action nodes, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to choose this over get_execution/list_executions. The guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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