list_expired_pushes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a useful scope ('authenticated account's') but does not disclose other behaviors like pagination details or return format. Given the annotations, the incremental value is moderate, aligning with a baseline acceptable disclosure.

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 that states exactly what the tool does without any redundancy or filler. It is efficiently front-loaded and earns every word.

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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter, the description plus annotations and schema provide sufficient information. The absence of an output schema leaves a minor ambiguity about return format, but the verb 'List' implies an array of pushes, so the overall completeness is strong.

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% for the single 'page' parameter, including a description 'Page number (50 per page)'. The tool description adds no additional semantic information about the parameter, so the schema carries the full burden—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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'expired pushes' and scope 'authenticated account's', making its purpose unmistakable and differentiating it from siblings like 'list_active_pushes' and 'get_push_audit'.

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 description gives a clear context: use this tool when needing expired pushes of the authenticated account. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is sufficiently clear that an agent can infer the appropriate use.

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