list-test-results

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

No annotations provided. Description does not disclose behavior beyond listing: missing details on pagination (page/size params), read-only nature, or any side effects. The 'Optionally filter' line is inaccurate given schema requirement.

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?

Extremely concise at one sentence, but lacks structure. No separation for when-to-use, output, or parameter behavior. Could be more informative without adding much length.

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?

Given no output schema and 4 params (2 required) with missing descriptions for page/size, the description is insufficient. Does not mention pagination behavior, result ordering, or what constitutes a 'test result'. Incomplete for effective tool invocation.

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 description coverage is 50% (projectId, launchId have descriptions). Description adds no parameter-level detail; it repeats 'filter by launch' inaccurately and ignores page/size entirely.

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?

Description states verb 'List' and resource 'test results in a project', which is clear. However, it claims 'Optionally filter by launch' while input schema requires launchId, creating a contradiction that undermines clarity.

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 like get-launch-test-results or other list tools. No context about prerequisites or typical use cases.

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