list_export_jobs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does add two behavioral facts: the list is scoped to the active workspace, and exports are asynchronous. It does not disclose whether the list includes statuses, whether it is read-only, or whether pagination/filtering exists, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two short sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and the async workflow note earning its place. No filler or redundancy.

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 description covers the export lifecycle and workspace scoping, which is useful for invoking the tool. Since there is no output schema, the agent is not told what fields the listing returns (e.g., job IDs/statuses needed for polling), so the picture is not fully complete.

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%, so the optional 'profile' parameter is already documented in the schema. The description adds no detail about how the profile affects the active-workspace scoping, but the high coverage makes that acceptable.

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 a clear action ('List') and resource ('Survey Solutions export jobs') with a workspace scope, so an agent can identify what the tool does. It is not explicit about how it differs from sibling get_export_job, though plural 'jobs' and 'list' signal a collection operation.

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 second sentence gives useful workflow context—exports are asynchronous, so listing jobs is part of a start/poll/download sequence. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over get_export_job, start_export, or cancel_export_job, so 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.