list_execution_outputs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description shoulders the full burden. It states the tool lists all outputs and supports filtering, but does not disclose behavior like pagination limits beyond the schema default, ordering, return structure, or whether it only returns metadata. These gaps are notable for a list tool.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. The list of output types is slightly redundant with the output_type enum, but the description is otherwise efficient and well ordered.

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 no annotations, a complete description should mention what the returned list contains, any pagination behavior, and how to use the limit parameter effectively. The description covers filtering well but omits these practical details, making it adequate but not comprehensive.

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%, so the schema already fully documents each parameter. The description adds a high-level mention of filtering but no extra semantic value beyond what the parameter descriptions provide. 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') and resource ('output files generated by command executions'), and enumerates content scope (stdout, stderr, log files). It clearly distinguishes from sibling 'read_execution_output' by focusing on listing multiple files rather than reading one.

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 implies usage for discovering/listing output files and mentions filtering options, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings like 'read_execution_output' or 'delete_execution_outputs'. No exclusion or alternative guidance is given.

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