list_recent_refreshes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that it's SPICE refresh history scoped to a dataset, but doesn't disclose ordering, pagination, or what fields a refresh record contains, leaving behavioral gaps despite the light annotation coverage.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. Appropriate size for a simple list tool.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering read-only safety, the description needs only to state purpose and scope, which it does. Minor gaps remain around sibling differentiation and return ordering, but overall it's sufficient for correct 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 100% with both parameters fully documented in the schema (limit default and dataset_id). The description adds no parameter syntax or format beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb 'List' and resource 'SPICE refresh history for a dataset', which is clear. However, it doesn't distinguish itself from closely related siblings like get_refresh_status or refresh_dataset, leaving ambiguity about when this read-only history listing is preferred over those.

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 get_refresh_status, refresh_dataset, or cancel_refresh. An agent must infer that this is for historical listing only, with no explicit conditions or alternatives offered.

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